Reviews by shotgunshane
Etymotic Evo
Triple Armature
MSRP: $499
Evo was provided by Etymotic as a review loaner
In many firsts for Etymotic, they have introduced a triple armature, concha filling, over-ear fit IEM with a Linum BaX T2 cable. Makes me dizzy just typing all that out. This is a huge departure from the standard Ety formula and no doubt an exciting one for Ety fans across the globe.
The triple armature configuration is dual low frequency drivers and a single midrange/treble driver in a 2 way configuration. Impedance is listed at 47 ohms, so while not as power hungry as the ER-4S of old, it does take a good bit of volume, compared to average in-ears, to get to loud listening levels.
The housings are an anodized stainless steel in a very pleasing blue color with gold Ety logo laser-etched on the faceplate. The housing are very comfortable but do have the standard long Ety nozzles. I find that the fit is certainly deeper than average but perhaps not quite as deep as the standard Ety straight single driver shape, since the body of the IEM will limit you. With the supplied double flange tips, the Evo also inserts easier than the standard single driver shape. Pulling up on the ear as you insert isn’t a requirement, at least for me. If you’ve never tried Westone’s Otto-Ease with your Etys, maybe you should; it makes all Etys a little easier to fit.
Photo from Etymotic.com
Ety has opted for the Estron Linum T2 connectors, which Ultimate Ears also recently adopted. UE T2 cables should be interchangeable with the Evo. The stock Evo cable is a black 3.5mm BaX cable. These are super thin and frankly disappear in usage; they are particularly comfortable when wearing glasses. When I first heard they were going to use the regular BaX, I was concerned with tangling, as the original BaX was a bit of a tangle monster. However, it has been very pleasant to use; it seems Estron has worked out the twisting and tangle issues of old. Plus the black looks much better than the clear sleeving of old as well. While being very thin, the BaX should be fairly durable. All in all, the Ety BaX cable is very pleasant surprise.
This Head-Fi tour loaner did not come with retail packaging but did include the new stock metal round carrying case. The lid just kind of pops off; perhaps a twist off would be safer but only time will tell. It’s small enough size to pocket and has a removable foam insert that lets you wrap the cable around and safely place the housings into custom cutouts. If you opt not to use the foam insert, I would consider picking up something to line the inside of the case that adds more cushioning.
Sound
The Evo, while lightly colored from the standard Ety target response here and there, is still mostly a neutralish in-ear, particularly compared to most tunings things out there. This is most bass enhanced armature I’ve heard from Ety (I haven’t heard the 3 series but have all the other permutations), but it’s far from being bassy. This is also one of the more relaxed upper mid tunings from Ety I’ve heard, but it’s far from being a relaxed upper midrange; it’s still an Ety. Treble seems to continue to the Ety tradition of being somewhat relaxed with deep fit, although Evo seems to have much less lower treble in the transition area from upper midrange to treble. I hear small treble peaks at approximately 8k and 10.5k but they are very very tame with standard Ety brain-tickling fit.
Photo from Etymotic.com
Comparisons:
via Mac Mini >> Pi2AES (via AES) >> RME ADI-2 PRO FS R
Measurements taken with Chinese Clone 711 coupler, Apple Lightning Dongle, iPhone 12 Pro, Studio Six Digital AudioTools
Vs. Etymotic ER4XR
MSRP $299
The Evo bass is slightly fuller and deeper sounding than the ER4XR. While it’s not a large difference, it can make a large difference in preference. It rumbles harder and hits with more authority; it displays a more nuanced texture with ease. Listening to electronic music and rap is just more palpable and leads to more enjoyment on the Evo. The extra bit on the bottom is nice for all those thinner recordings.
The midrange is very resolving and transparent on both models, however the Evo has a slightly richer and smoother male vocal. While this comes at the cost of low level nuance and resolution, it does so without losing too much. The same follows suite with female vocals; they are more energetic and raw sounding on the ER4XR and slightly fuller, richer on the Evo. Think of vocals as slightly more transparent, nuanced and energetic on the ER4XR but slightly richer and smoother sounding on the Evo. The differences are minor but can certainly evoke stronger preference responses one way or the other. I love the vocal nuances on the ER4XR.
Evo rock guitar bite and crunch is a little smoothed compared to the ER4XR, which has a more energetic attack. On the other hand, Evo ads a little weight and body to rock guitars, whereas they sound a little leaner on the ER4XR. Since Ety treble, with deep enough fit is fairly easy going, neither have an airy presentation, so guitars don’t quite soar like they do on brighter sets.
Treble extension has always had a solid showing in the Ety frequency response for the most part, but a sense of airiness is not something I equate with the Ety house sound. While the ER4XR is brighter in lower treble, where the upper mid transitions into treble, the Evo middle treble is more present than the ER4XR, as well as a hair more defined. So at times, the ER4XR can sound a little brighter, yet the Evo more defined. For example, Matthew Sweet’s Girlfriend is a splashy, messy recording, and the mishmash of cymbals and high-hats is slightly more defined and resolved on the Evo.
Staging has never really been something Ety in-ears have excelled at and while the apple doesn’t fall too far form the cart here, the Evo does sound incrementally bigger than the ER4XR. I do hear it as both a wider and deeper, as well as a bit better at imaging and layering; there is more space around the instruments and placement is more precise. The Evo is pretty competent here, and dare I say, satisfying in these technical aspects.
Vs. Moondrop Illumination
MSRP $799
I’ve previously written a comparison of the Illumination with the ER4XR and much of those difference apply here, so I’ve massaged those previous thoughts with how they apply to this Evo Comparison:
Bass on the Illumination is fuller and denser than the Evo. It has a bit more impact as well as rumble. The Evo bass is quicker, more nimble, and while more elevated than previous armature based Ety’s, it misses the more natural feeling of decay and air movement of the Illumination. The Illumination bass really makes me think this is what a a high-end Ety tuned dynamic driver might sound like.
Male vocals are wonderfully intimate and forward on both, however, Illumination sounds more intimate and brighter through the upper midrange. Before, I thought the ER4XR out resolved the Illumination a bit through the midrange, but in this comparison, I’m no longer hearing the increase of midrange resolution with the Evo. Instead both are pretty smooth and neither have the slight hint of speaking into cupped hands effect of the ER4XR, that brings small nuances to the forefront. Moving to female vocals, the Illumination is both a little brighter and more full bodied, and surprisingly, a little more resolving of female vocal nuances. The Evo comes across as more mid-centric and relaxed in direct comparison.
The Illumination has more lower and mid treble presence, so it sounds modestly brighter, in a good way. The Evo, like the ER4XR sounds fairly tame in treble, even a bit relaxed in comparison. For the most part, Illumination does a better job of letting me delineate between cymbal crashes and hi-hats, but on occasion Illumination glosses over treble details that the Evo picks up on a little better. That being said, the Illumination treble timbre is ultimately more natural and realistic; brass just sounds brassier.
Evo, while sounding bigger and more competent in staging than its single armature predecessors, still doesn’t sound as big as Illumination. Illumination sounds noticeably wider, deeper and taller. Illumination is simply more dynamic and spacious.
The Illumination is about the closest in-ear we have to a dynamic driver ER4 variant, at least of those I’ve heard. It’s much easier to wear, thanks to its shallower insertion. This is an important factor if you take your monitors in and out quite often to talk to someone. That being said, Evo narrows this gaps considerably from previous Etys in-ears.
Vs. Moondrop Blessing 2
MSRP $319
The Blessing 2 hits with harder mid bass impact and punch, as well as feeling richer in upper bass, while both rumble pretty similarly. The Evo bass is cleaner, yet just as textured, at least in low and sub bass. The Blessing 2 bass is just ok in texture for a dynamic driver; while delivering some of that dynamic driver naturalness, it sounds a bit over damped and stuffy in comparison.
The Blessing 2 strong suit is its midrange. It’s pretty neutral, it’s transparent, and it’s very resolving. All descriptors that typically apply to an Ety as well. I find the Evo midrange to be slightly smoother, as the ~2.5k peak agrees with my ears a bit better than peaks at 3k and beyond but the difference here is pretty tiny. I’ve got to say, the Blessing 2 goes toe to toe with the Evo for midrange transparency and resolution. On male vocal, perhaps the Blessing 2 has touch more upper mid brightness and lower mid fullness. Whether this is better or not is purely up to your preference. In the vocal tracks I tested with, the biggest difference between the two is how they handle sibilance- the Evo seems to de-accentuate some recorded sibilants and the Blessing 2 seems to accentuate it just bit. Female vocals do have a bit more energy and brightness with the Blessing 2; Lzzy Hale sounds a bit more raw and emotional with the Blessing 2 and a little more reserved on Evo.
Treble is pretty dramatic between the two, particularly in timbre. The Blessing 2 definitely sounds off after switching from the Evo. The treble peak of the Blessing 2 sounds oddly tinny and wispy thin when comparing. While I’ve picked at the the treble peak of the Blessing 2 in other comparisons, its never previously come across so dramatically off putting. Conversely, the Evo sounds fairly laid back up top next to Blessing 2, lending towards a more mid-centric sound when going back and forth. I suppose you could say treble resolution is better on the Blessing 2, as its brighter presentation pushes many sounds more up front. The same details are there on Evo, it’s just more relaxed about serving them to you, while also sounding more natural.
While the Evo has taken a significant step forward in presenting a bigger sonic image within the Ety house tuning, it’s still just average when comparing to other models outside the Ety brand. Here the Blessing 2 sounds a good bit wider and deeper with more overall room to breathe; as a result, imaging and layering get a bump over the Evo as well.
Wrap Up
As an Ety fan, I’m glad to see them take all these leaps they’ve made with Evo. In particular, I really appreciate the concha filling, over-ear fit. The housings are comfortable and easy to fit and the T2 BaX is practically invisible feeling in use. I’d love to see them migrate to this cable for the other series as well.
It’s hard to imaging an Ety fan not liking the Evo but also not hard to imagine them still preferring this or that model. Ety has taken great care in tuning their first multi-armature, somehow balancing a new tuning, while still being recognizable as an Ety family tuning. The improved rumble and texture down low is sure to create a new wave of Ety heads in the months and years to come.
Triple Armature
MSRP: $499
Evo was provided by Etymotic as a review loaner
In many firsts for Etymotic, they have introduced a triple armature, concha filling, over-ear fit IEM with a Linum BaX T2 cable. Makes me dizzy just typing all that out. This is a huge departure from the standard Ety formula and no doubt an exciting one for Ety fans across the globe.
The triple armature configuration is dual low frequency drivers and a single midrange/treble driver in a 2 way configuration. Impedance is listed at 47 ohms, so while not as power hungry as the ER-4S of old, it does take a good bit of volume, compared to average in-ears, to get to loud listening levels.
The housings are an anodized stainless steel in a very pleasing blue color with gold Ety logo laser-etched on the faceplate. The housing are very comfortable but do have the standard long Ety nozzles. I find that the fit is certainly deeper than average but perhaps not quite as deep as the standard Ety straight single driver shape, since the body of the IEM will limit you. With the supplied double flange tips, the Evo also inserts easier than the standard single driver shape. Pulling up on the ear as you insert isn’t a requirement, at least for me. If you’ve never tried Westone’s Otto-Ease with your Etys, maybe you should; it makes all Etys a little easier to fit.
Photo from Etymotic.com
Ety has opted for the Estron Linum T2 connectors, which Ultimate Ears also recently adopted. UE T2 cables should be interchangeable with the Evo. The stock Evo cable is a black 3.5mm BaX cable. These are super thin and frankly disappear in usage; they are particularly comfortable when wearing glasses. When I first heard they were going to use the regular BaX, I was concerned with tangling, as the original BaX was a bit of a tangle monster. However, it has been very pleasant to use; it seems Estron has worked out the twisting and tangle issues of old. Plus the black looks much better than the clear sleeving of old as well. While being very thin, the BaX should be fairly durable. All in all, the Ety BaX cable is very pleasant surprise.
This Head-Fi tour loaner did not come with retail packaging but did include the new stock metal round carrying case. The lid just kind of pops off; perhaps a twist off would be safer but only time will tell. It’s small enough size to pocket and has a removable foam insert that lets you wrap the cable around and safely place the housings into custom cutouts. If you opt not to use the foam insert, I would consider picking up something to line the inside of the case that adds more cushioning.
Sound
The Evo, while lightly colored from the standard Ety target response here and there, is still mostly a neutralish in-ear, particularly compared to most tunings things out there. This is most bass enhanced armature I’ve heard from Ety (I haven’t heard the 3 series but have all the other permutations), but it’s far from being bassy. This is also one of the more relaxed upper mid tunings from Ety I’ve heard, but it’s far from being a relaxed upper midrange; it’s still an Ety. Treble seems to continue to the Ety tradition of being somewhat relaxed with deep fit, although Evo seems to have much less lower treble in the transition area from upper midrange to treble. I hear small treble peaks at approximately 8k and 10.5k but they are very very tame with standard Ety brain-tickling fit.
Photo from Etymotic.com
Comparisons:
via Mac Mini >> Pi2AES (via AES) >> RME ADI-2 PRO FS R
Measurements taken with Chinese Clone 711 coupler, Apple Lightning Dongle, iPhone 12 Pro, Studio Six Digital AudioTools
Vs. Etymotic ER4XR
MSRP $299
The Evo bass is slightly fuller and deeper sounding than the ER4XR. While it’s not a large difference, it can make a large difference in preference. It rumbles harder and hits with more authority; it displays a more nuanced texture with ease. Listening to electronic music and rap is just more palpable and leads to more enjoyment on the Evo. The extra bit on the bottom is nice for all those thinner recordings.
The midrange is very resolving and transparent on both models, however the Evo has a slightly richer and smoother male vocal. While this comes at the cost of low level nuance and resolution, it does so without losing too much. The same follows suite with female vocals; they are more energetic and raw sounding on the ER4XR and slightly fuller, richer on the Evo. Think of vocals as slightly more transparent, nuanced and energetic on the ER4XR but slightly richer and smoother sounding on the Evo. The differences are minor but can certainly evoke stronger preference responses one way or the other. I love the vocal nuances on the ER4XR.
Evo rock guitar bite and crunch is a little smoothed compared to the ER4XR, which has a more energetic attack. On the other hand, Evo ads a little weight and body to rock guitars, whereas they sound a little leaner on the ER4XR. Since Ety treble, with deep enough fit is fairly easy going, neither have an airy presentation, so guitars don’t quite soar like they do on brighter sets.
Treble extension has always had a solid showing in the Ety frequency response for the most part, but a sense of airiness is not something I equate with the Ety house sound. While the ER4XR is brighter in lower treble, where the upper mid transitions into treble, the Evo middle treble is more present than the ER4XR, as well as a hair more defined. So at times, the ER4XR can sound a little brighter, yet the Evo more defined. For example, Matthew Sweet’s Girlfriend is a splashy, messy recording, and the mishmash of cymbals and high-hats is slightly more defined and resolved on the Evo.
Staging has never really been something Ety in-ears have excelled at and while the apple doesn’t fall too far form the cart here, the Evo does sound incrementally bigger than the ER4XR. I do hear it as both a wider and deeper, as well as a bit better at imaging and layering; there is more space around the instruments and placement is more precise. The Evo is pretty competent here, and dare I say, satisfying in these technical aspects.
Vs. Moondrop Illumination
MSRP $799
I’ve previously written a comparison of the Illumination with the ER4XR and much of those difference apply here, so I’ve massaged those previous thoughts with how they apply to this Evo Comparison:
Bass on the Illumination is fuller and denser than the Evo. It has a bit more impact as well as rumble. The Evo bass is quicker, more nimble, and while more elevated than previous armature based Ety’s, it misses the more natural feeling of decay and air movement of the Illumination. The Illumination bass really makes me think this is what a a high-end Ety tuned dynamic driver might sound like.
Male vocals are wonderfully intimate and forward on both, however, Illumination sounds more intimate and brighter through the upper midrange. Before, I thought the ER4XR out resolved the Illumination a bit through the midrange, but in this comparison, I’m no longer hearing the increase of midrange resolution with the Evo. Instead both are pretty smooth and neither have the slight hint of speaking into cupped hands effect of the ER4XR, that brings small nuances to the forefront. Moving to female vocals, the Illumination is both a little brighter and more full bodied, and surprisingly, a little more resolving of female vocal nuances. The Evo comes across as more mid-centric and relaxed in direct comparison.
The Illumination has more lower and mid treble presence, so it sounds modestly brighter, in a good way. The Evo, like the ER4XR sounds fairly tame in treble, even a bit relaxed in comparison. For the most part, Illumination does a better job of letting me delineate between cymbal crashes and hi-hats, but on occasion Illumination glosses over treble details that the Evo picks up on a little better. That being said, the Illumination treble timbre is ultimately more natural and realistic; brass just sounds brassier.
Evo, while sounding bigger and more competent in staging than its single armature predecessors, still doesn’t sound as big as Illumination. Illumination sounds noticeably wider, deeper and taller. Illumination is simply more dynamic and spacious.
The Illumination is about the closest in-ear we have to a dynamic driver ER4 variant, at least of those I’ve heard. It’s much easier to wear, thanks to its shallower insertion. This is an important factor if you take your monitors in and out quite often to talk to someone. That being said, Evo narrows this gaps considerably from previous Etys in-ears.
Vs. Moondrop Blessing 2
MSRP $319
The Blessing 2 hits with harder mid bass impact and punch, as well as feeling richer in upper bass, while both rumble pretty similarly. The Evo bass is cleaner, yet just as textured, at least in low and sub bass. The Blessing 2 bass is just ok in texture for a dynamic driver; while delivering some of that dynamic driver naturalness, it sounds a bit over damped and stuffy in comparison.
The Blessing 2 strong suit is its midrange. It’s pretty neutral, it’s transparent, and it’s very resolving. All descriptors that typically apply to an Ety as well. I find the Evo midrange to be slightly smoother, as the ~2.5k peak agrees with my ears a bit better than peaks at 3k and beyond but the difference here is pretty tiny. I’ve got to say, the Blessing 2 goes toe to toe with the Evo for midrange transparency and resolution. On male vocal, perhaps the Blessing 2 has touch more upper mid brightness and lower mid fullness. Whether this is better or not is purely up to your preference. In the vocal tracks I tested with, the biggest difference between the two is how they handle sibilance- the Evo seems to de-accentuate some recorded sibilants and the Blessing 2 seems to accentuate it just bit. Female vocals do have a bit more energy and brightness with the Blessing 2; Lzzy Hale sounds a bit more raw and emotional with the Blessing 2 and a little more reserved on Evo.
Treble is pretty dramatic between the two, particularly in timbre. The Blessing 2 definitely sounds off after switching from the Evo. The treble peak of the Blessing 2 sounds oddly tinny and wispy thin when comparing. While I’ve picked at the the treble peak of the Blessing 2 in other comparisons, its never previously come across so dramatically off putting. Conversely, the Evo sounds fairly laid back up top next to Blessing 2, lending towards a more mid-centric sound when going back and forth. I suppose you could say treble resolution is better on the Blessing 2, as its brighter presentation pushes many sounds more up front. The same details are there on Evo, it’s just more relaxed about serving them to you, while also sounding more natural.
While the Evo has taken a significant step forward in presenting a bigger sonic image within the Ety house tuning, it’s still just average when comparing to other models outside the Ety brand. Here the Blessing 2 sounds a good bit wider and deeper with more overall room to breathe; as a result, imaging and layering get a bump over the Evo as well.
Wrap Up
As an Ety fan, I’m glad to see them take all these leaps they’ve made with Evo. In particular, I really appreciate the concha filling, over-ear fit. The housings are comfortable and easy to fit and the T2 BaX is practically invisible feeling in use. I’d love to see them migrate to this cable for the other series as well.
It’s hard to imaging an Ety fan not liking the Evo but also not hard to imagine them still preferring this or that model. Ety has taken great care in tuning their first multi-armature, somehow balancing a new tuning, while still being recognizable as an Ety family tuning. The improved rumble and texture down low is sure to create a new wave of Ety heads in the months and years to come.
Simgot EN700 Pro
msrp $149.99
disclaimer: Simgot provided the EN700 Pro free of charge
Aesthetics
The housing shape is rounded and free from sharp edges. Fit is easy and very comfortable. Housing plates are plastic, designed to look like a metal grill. The effect is either stately or tacky bling, whichever really depends on my mood. Supplied tips are plentiful and pretty decent, but I preferred JVC Spiral Dots for their larger aperture, allowing maximum treble response and shallow fit. The leather like case is a good one, with a magnetic flap, that is a style reminiscent of some of JVC’s nicer cases.
As of late, many Chinese manufacturers are offering stock cables that have a somewhat custom appearance and the EN700 Pro is a fine example. The stock cable is above and beyond what many American counterparts offer. The plug is more robust with a look more common to custom boutique cable makers. The Y-split and slider are a little beefier as well, if a little less sleek than I prefer. The 4 core cable is finished with an aesthetically pleasing twist. Overall the cable is supple and memory free, below the over the ear section. However… this is where it all goes south for me. The Simgot cable is designed for over the ear wear only, and while it doesn’t contain a stiff wire, the preformed ‘memory’ section has excessive curl that makes every attempt possible to pull the housings out of my ears. After a few days of annoyance, I spent a good hour slowly cutting it away, tiny piece by tiny piece, ensuring not to damage the cable itself. The end result is far superior fit. The cable is supple enough it will stay over the ear without the aggravating memory section.
Enough with the boring stuff, let’s get to the fun stuff.
Sound
I would put the EN700 Pro in the V shaped category. The EN700 Pro also has a healthy bass and treble boost. At lower volumes, it’s great for background listening and with the flush fitting housings, it makes a relaxing bedtime listening companion (at low volumes). But at louder volumes, the V shape becomes more pronounced. it’s not an IEM that forces you to take notice (although it can hit pretty hard) and It won’t throw details in your face. In fact, the EN700 Pro isn’t much about nuance, layering and imaging. It’s more about an organic, blended single 10mm dynamic musical experience.
Comparisons
All comparisons were done from the following chain:
iPhone > USB3 camera connection kit > Grace SDAC > Cavalli Liquid Carbon X
vs Brainwavz B400
The quad armature B400 is noticeably leaner upon switching from the EN700 Pro, while still sounding a little on the warm side itself. The B400 bass doesn’t reach as deep, nor does it have as much rumble as the EN700 Pro.
Both present a rich and full male vocal but the EN700 pull them closer to the listener for a more intimate performance. With female vocals, the B400 gives a little more energy and more emphasis on overtones, whereas female voices on EN700 Pro are deeper and fuller with slightly less bite.
The B400 presents rock guitars with more forward attack and the EN700 Pro blunts and smooths them out a bit. The B400 also sounds a little airier but it’s by no means an airy IEM. Overall the B400 sounds a bit more balanced across the frequency response but suffers from balanced armature timbre. The EN700 Pro sounds bigger in scape, more natural in tone and more realistic in timbre.
vs Noble X
The dual balanced armature Noble X also sounds on the warm and smooth side. It’s bass can sound quite powerful for a dual armature. Compared to the EN700 Pro, The Noble X hits nearly as hard but doesn’t plumb the depths like Simgot. Texture and rumble is more palpable on the EN700 Pro. The low end of the Noble X hangs in surprisingly well though.
The midrange of the Noble X has this bit of ethereal haze. While it lacks transparency and clarity, it gives its midrange a musical and quite engaging appeal. Male vocals on the Noble X sound a bit fuller and more intimate. Comparatively and surprisingly, the EN700 sounds noticeably clearer and more transparent, if a bit further in distance. With female vocals, the Noble X again sounds a bit fuller and a bit more blunted, less energetic. While the EN700 sounds more distant/less intimate it does inject a little more energy in female voices. Treble presence is greater on the EN700 Pro, as well as having a slight edge on clarity.
This was another comparison that surprised me. I’m not the biggest fan of dual armatures in general, as I tend to find something lacking, and I expected the EN700 Pro to walk away a clearly superior IEM. However the Noble X, like it often does, reminds me just how good an IEM it is. What it gives up in technical prowess, it gains in musical engagement.
vs Alpha & Delta D6 (micropore tape modded)
The micropore tape modded D6 is a tiny bit warmer and more balanced than the mid-centric stock signature. D6 bass is on the lean and fast side; it reaches fairly deep but at much reduced SPL compared to the EN700 Pro. The D6 is reminiscent of armature type speed next to the boosted rumble and slower decay of the EN700 Pro. Bass rumble and texturing is much more overt on the EN700 Pro.
Both male and female vocals are more forward on the D6; midrange weight is lighter and overall more aggressive in presentation. While the D6 is more forward through the midrange, it sounds less clear and transparent.
Suprisingly the D6 sounds less bright, as some of it’s treble presence is masked by it’s mid-forardness. The EN700 Pro sounds more sparkly and resolving up top. Overall the D6 sounds much smaller in scape; certainly more in-head but makes up for its comparatively small presentation with an aggressive, yet musically engaging midrange. In contrast, the EN700 Pro sounds obviously grander in scale in all directions- height, width and depth.
Conclusion
The Simgot EN700 Pro wasn’t an IEM that surprised and wowed me in everyday listening. But every time I directly compared it to another IEM, I certainly came away both surprised and impressed. I wouldn’t recommend this tuning this to someone looking for a highly detailed, multi-layered and technical monster with pin point imaging… however, if you’re a bass lover- craving deep sub bass rumble without sacrificing clarity, a dynamic driver lover- craving natural timbre or just a lover of a larger and more dynamic soundscape, the EN700 Pro should be considered. For me, I found it most enjoyable on the go. I used the EN700 Pro many times with the Radsone EarStudio ES100 for really engrossing exercise rig. In fact, the EN700 Pro is nearly the perfect signature for walking/running around town, where outdoor noise is quite high.
msrp $149.99
disclaimer: Simgot provided the EN700 Pro free of charge
Aesthetics
The housing shape is rounded and free from sharp edges. Fit is easy and very comfortable. Housing plates are plastic, designed to look like a metal grill. The effect is either stately or tacky bling, whichever really depends on my mood. Supplied tips are plentiful and pretty decent, but I preferred JVC Spiral Dots for their larger aperture, allowing maximum treble response and shallow fit. The leather like case is a good one, with a magnetic flap, that is a style reminiscent of some of JVC’s nicer cases.
As of late, many Chinese manufacturers are offering stock cables that have a somewhat custom appearance and the EN700 Pro is a fine example. The stock cable is above and beyond what many American counterparts offer. The plug is more robust with a look more common to custom boutique cable makers. The Y-split and slider are a little beefier as well, if a little less sleek than I prefer. The 4 core cable is finished with an aesthetically pleasing twist. Overall the cable is supple and memory free, below the over the ear section. However… this is where it all goes south for me. The Simgot cable is designed for over the ear wear only, and while it doesn’t contain a stiff wire, the preformed ‘memory’ section has excessive curl that makes every attempt possible to pull the housings out of my ears. After a few days of annoyance, I spent a good hour slowly cutting it away, tiny piece by tiny piece, ensuring not to damage the cable itself. The end result is far superior fit. The cable is supple enough it will stay over the ear without the aggravating memory section.
Enough with the boring stuff, let’s get to the fun stuff.
Sound
I would put the EN700 Pro in the V shaped category. The EN700 Pro also has a healthy bass and treble boost. At lower volumes, it’s great for background listening and with the flush fitting housings, it makes a relaxing bedtime listening companion (at low volumes). But at louder volumes, the V shape becomes more pronounced. it’s not an IEM that forces you to take notice (although it can hit pretty hard) and It won’t throw details in your face. In fact, the EN700 Pro isn’t much about nuance, layering and imaging. It’s more about an organic, blended single 10mm dynamic musical experience.
Comparisons
All comparisons were done from the following chain:
iPhone > USB3 camera connection kit > Grace SDAC > Cavalli Liquid Carbon X
vs Brainwavz B400
The quad armature B400 is noticeably leaner upon switching from the EN700 Pro, while still sounding a little on the warm side itself. The B400 bass doesn’t reach as deep, nor does it have as much rumble as the EN700 Pro.
Both present a rich and full male vocal but the EN700 pull them closer to the listener for a more intimate performance. With female vocals, the B400 gives a little more energy and more emphasis on overtones, whereas female voices on EN700 Pro are deeper and fuller with slightly less bite.
The B400 presents rock guitars with more forward attack and the EN700 Pro blunts and smooths them out a bit. The B400 also sounds a little airier but it’s by no means an airy IEM. Overall the B400 sounds a bit more balanced across the frequency response but suffers from balanced armature timbre. The EN700 Pro sounds bigger in scape, more natural in tone and more realistic in timbre.
vs Noble X
The dual balanced armature Noble X also sounds on the warm and smooth side. It’s bass can sound quite powerful for a dual armature. Compared to the EN700 Pro, The Noble X hits nearly as hard but doesn’t plumb the depths like Simgot. Texture and rumble is more palpable on the EN700 Pro. The low end of the Noble X hangs in surprisingly well though.
The midrange of the Noble X has this bit of ethereal haze. While it lacks transparency and clarity, it gives its midrange a musical and quite engaging appeal. Male vocals on the Noble X sound a bit fuller and more intimate. Comparatively and surprisingly, the EN700 sounds noticeably clearer and more transparent, if a bit further in distance. With female vocals, the Noble X again sounds a bit fuller and a bit more blunted, less energetic. While the EN700 sounds more distant/less intimate it does inject a little more energy in female voices. Treble presence is greater on the EN700 Pro, as well as having a slight edge on clarity.
This was another comparison that surprised me. I’m not the biggest fan of dual armatures in general, as I tend to find something lacking, and I expected the EN700 Pro to walk away a clearly superior IEM. However the Noble X, like it often does, reminds me just how good an IEM it is. What it gives up in technical prowess, it gains in musical engagement.
vs Alpha & Delta D6 (micropore tape modded)
The micropore tape modded D6 is a tiny bit warmer and more balanced than the mid-centric stock signature. D6 bass is on the lean and fast side; it reaches fairly deep but at much reduced SPL compared to the EN700 Pro. The D6 is reminiscent of armature type speed next to the boosted rumble and slower decay of the EN700 Pro. Bass rumble and texturing is much more overt on the EN700 Pro.
Both male and female vocals are more forward on the D6; midrange weight is lighter and overall more aggressive in presentation. While the D6 is more forward through the midrange, it sounds less clear and transparent.
Suprisingly the D6 sounds less bright, as some of it’s treble presence is masked by it’s mid-forardness. The EN700 Pro sounds more sparkly and resolving up top. Overall the D6 sounds much smaller in scape; certainly more in-head but makes up for its comparatively small presentation with an aggressive, yet musically engaging midrange. In contrast, the EN700 Pro sounds obviously grander in scale in all directions- height, width and depth.
Conclusion
The Simgot EN700 Pro wasn’t an IEM that surprised and wowed me in everyday listening. But every time I directly compared it to another IEM, I certainly came away both surprised and impressed. I wouldn’t recommend this tuning this to someone looking for a highly detailed, multi-layered and technical monster with pin point imaging… however, if you’re a bass lover- craving deep sub bass rumble without sacrificing clarity, a dynamic driver lover- craving natural timbre or just a lover of a larger and more dynamic soundscape, the EN700 Pro should be considered. For me, I found it most enjoyable on the go. I used the EN700 Pro many times with the Radsone EarStudio ES100 for really engrossing exercise rig. In fact, the EN700 Pro is nearly the perfect signature for walking/running around town, where outdoor noise is quite high.
Note: Mee Audio graciously provided the Pinnacle P1 free for review
MEE Audio has been without a flagship for a couple of years, since the discontinuation of the very well received A161p. The A161p was single armature design with a balanced signature leaning to the slightly warm side. The A161p, along with the venerable Audio Technica CK10, were my gateway in-ears into a more neutral frequency response, and accordingly preserve fond memory in my portable audio journey. Consequently, I’ve been looking forward to the day MEE Audio found a worthy replacement at the top of their line-up. The Pinnacle P1 has been over two years in the making, and at $199 msrp, is $100 more than their previous flagship. Can MEE Audio still still remain true to their reputation as one of the better bang for buck manufacturers out there?
The P1 comes with two cables: a high grade audio cable made of silver-plated copper and an Android/iOS compatible microphone cable. Both cables utilize the mmcx connection. The cables feel more robust than your average stock cable; they are thicker, yet very pliable. They feature a twisted cable design that features a case friendly right angle plug and sturdy Y-split with neck cinch. The high grade audio cable is the same aged brass color of the P1 zinc alloy housings. Using this cable gives the overall appearance a kind of ‘mid-century modern’ design aesthetic.
The rest of the accessories round out as follows: shirt clip, 6 pair of silicone tips, 3 pair of Comply tips, 1/4” adapter and carrying case. The carrying case is an elegant, leather style case with a magnetic closure flap. The flap is topped off with a “Pinnacle” metal badge in the same aged brass look with inscribed serial number.
The overall sound signature of the P1 is that of a slightly downward slopping frequency response. The P1 is warm and smooth with good clarity. It delivers high levels of resolution with impressive driver control. The most notable feature of performance is its staging properties, which stand head and shoulders above most closed in-ears and rival, if not surpass, many back vented designs.
Bass is moderately boosted- bassheads will find it too light and your most ardent neutrality seekers will find it too boosted. The boost is centered around 150 Hz and remains strong until about 40 Hz before starting to significantly roll off. The P1 driver sounds pretty quick, especially when compared to other dynamic driver models which tend to extend decay much longer. Texturing is excellent with high levels of bass resolution. Notes are on the thicker side with a naturally rich and reverberant tone.
The lower midrange is full and delivers a very engaging and evocative male vocal. While there is a dip in the middle/upper midrange that gives some distance to the listener, the P1is still able to convey very good vocal intimacy. This dip also gives a slightly laid back and fuller nature to female vocals for less energy than in-ears with a more forward upper midrange. However, the upper midrange is rising by the time lower treble kicks in, so rock guitars still have pleasing bite and crunch but with a fuller, more rounded presentation.
The P1 treble is best described as smooth yet crisp. After a rise in lower treble, it is quite laid back from about 6k to 8K, where it peaks again in middle treble and stays pretty present through upper treble with very good extension. This treble response seems to correlate fairly well with the manufacturer’s claims. Treble weight and tonality are slightly on the thin side due to the greater upper treble presence, however resolution and low level detail are very good without harness or being overly forward in the mix.
Staging properties of the P1 are simply fantastic. It is not an ‘airy’ in-ear, yet it’s able to present a class leading spaciousness with strong ambient cues within the stage. There is a great sense of blackness around instruments, giving everything room to stretch and breathe. You really do get a strong sense of instrument placement and room size in proportion to the instruments. Height, width and depth are all really very good with one of the best three dimensional presentations on the market for in-ears. I really have to think the offset angle of the driver to the nozzle and the acoustic diffuser play a significant role in the perception of stage, especially in a closed design. It’s not something you have to concentrate on but is readily noticeable upon first listen.
SELECT COMPARISONS
P1 vs Etymotic ER-4S
The ER-4S bass sounds quite light and tails off several decibels as it descends into sub bass. However, it is excellently textured despite being low level in the presentation. Bass speed doesn’t seem overly fast like some balanced armatures, and can sound surprisingly natural during bass heavier masterings. Surprisingly the P1 is more difficult to drive than the ER-4S, requiring quite a bit more volume to reach the same SPL. In comparison, the P1 bass is more visceral, carrying a stronger bass line with more rumble and extension in deep bass. While the P1 isn’t drastically bassier, the difference is certainly palpable when the recording calls for it. The other significant difference is in the longer decay of the P1. While the P1may be considered quick for a dynamic, it does linger noticeably longer than the ER-4S.
The Ety midrange is quite clear with a noticeable tilt towards the upper midrange. Male vocals, while very resolving, are a bit on the thin side and slightly under weighted. The upper midrange tilt makes for very transparent female vocals full of raw energy and power. The ER-4S neither emphasizes, nor glosses over sibilance; you really feel like you’re getting what the recording is delivering. The ER-4S is forward in nature, providing an intimate vocal performance that’s very engaging. On the flip side the Ety can sound overly forward in guitar driven rock, taking the listener to the brink with thin and edgy distortion rock guitars.
The P1 midrange eschews some clarity for fullness and richness. Male vocals are clearly weightier and more powerful, without sacrificing resolution, and exhibiting wonderful texture and emotion. The P1 is nowhere as forward in the upper midrange and female vocals exhibit less energy and more weight. Rock guitars have good bite and crunch but don’t quite soar, as they are grounded with a fairly full lower midrange. The end result is a much more forgiving presentation than the Ety.
The ER-4S treble is one of my favorite. Unlike it’s upper midrange, it’s treble is neither hot nor laid back. It has excellent balance, timbre and sparkle, yet remains effortlessly smooth. Extension is also top notch as well. In companion, the P1 treble is not quite as evenly presented. There is more lower treble presence before a similar Ety dip in the transition from lower to middle treble. The P1 treble sounds crisper and not quite as smooth as the Ety. Extension seems fairly comparable between the two, which is to say, very good.
The ER-4S is not really known for its spacial qualities and as such sounds a bit flat in depth and height but has acceptable width. The presentation is very forward and close to the listener. As such, while imaging is excellent form left to right, there’s not much to speak of front to back. Even though the top end sounds open, the single driver delivers a more organic stage and doesn’t have the instrument separation that many multi-balanced armature designs portray.
The P1, while fuller sounding, presents things further back from the listener compared to the Ety. It sounds much larger in all directions, particularly in depth. It’s more reverberant and spacious sounding with strong ambient queues reminiscent of a concert hall type presentation. While similar to the Ety’s organic presentation, the P1 injects more space/blackness between instruments for much more lifelike proportions.
P1 vs FLC Technology FLC8S
FLC8S with the following filter choices: Clear ULF, Clear LF and Gold MF/HF
This set up was chosen to give the FLC8 the most linear and neutral frequency response possible with the filter choices available.
The FLC8S bass extends very deep and is still strong at 30 Hz in this set up. It has very satisfying rumble and impact. Bass feels linear between mid and upper bass and finishes with a rise in sub bass. As a whole it feels a little enhanced over neutral. Bass texturing is very good and decay sounds natural. Overall the FLC8S bass presence is pleasing with a healthy sprinkle of fun. At first blush, overall bass levels of the P1 sound fairly similar to the FLC8S but upon closer inspection, the FLC8S has a good bit more rumble, while the P1bass feels fuller and richer. In overall bass speed, I’d give the nod to the P1 as it feels just a bit snappier.
Both have fairly full bodied male vocals with the P1 being overall richer and fuller. The FLC8S is more pronounced in upper midrange presence, producing more energy for female vocals and, at times, can accentuate sibilance compared to the smoother P1. Where the FLC8 leans a bit more analytical, pushing details forward, the P1 produces more depth and vocal emotion. This same difference translates to the presentation of distortion guitars- the P1 has a thicker more robust guitar tone, and the FLC8S is slightly lighter and thinner but with cleaner overall note for more palpable rock guitar bite and crunch.
While both treble presentations are crisp, the FLC8S produces more sparkle and air with greater presence in the mix. For the most, part the FLC8S treble remains fatigue free with the exception of some accentuated sibilance mentioned before. While the P1 can’t match this more open and airy sound, it remains smoother for a more laid back listen.
The open and airy presentation of the FLC8S is above average in all directions with a very pleasing and open presentation. Even without the FLC8S sense of air, the P1 still sounds somehow larger. The sense of depth is more tangible, more three dimensional. The P1 puts more blackness between instruments, allowing the mind to expand the dimensions of the stage, giving more precise placement in space from front to back.
P1 vs Jays Q-Jays (v2)
The Q-Jays have a pretty large rise in deep bass with less mid and upper bass presence. In direct comparison, the Q-Jays bass sounds thinner in the upper end with less impact, but rumble is much more readily apparent. The dynamic driver of the P1 is more overt in texturing, displaying a more nuanced detailing in bass. It also has a more natural timbre and decay next to the slightly speedier dual balanced armatures of the Q-Jays.
Male vocals on the Q-Jays sound thinner and recessed next to the P1 but they aren’t necessarily thin on their own. The Q-Jays contain good heft but overall just fall short in richness and intimacy when compared to the P1. Female vocals also sound a bit thinner and more recessed next to the P1. The Q-Jays definitely sounds V shaped with a greater perception of clarity next to the meatier P1. If not worn deep enough, the Q-Jays can accentuate sibilance pretty strongly. With deeper fit it falls to more tolerable levels, although recordings with heavy sibilance are still a bit tough.
The Q-Jays have quite a bit of treble presence. After it’s dip in the upper midrange, it begins a steady climb from about 5k all the way through a fairly large peak around 9k. Deeper fit helps to somewhat control the peaks but one needs to appreciate a brighter signature. Next to the P1, the Q-Jays treble is thinner and lighter in weight with the P1 sounding more balanced and even across it’s upper frequency response. Where the P1 is built for longer listening sessions the Q-Jays are built for excitement.
The Q-Jays much brighter presentation, while airier and plenty wide, sounds overall flatter and smaller next to the P1. The P1 has much more space between instruments with a much greater and obvious sense of depth and height. While the Q-Jays are faster and more precise in stoping and starting, the P1’s reverberation and sense of ambiance is just simply more realistic in staging and imaging properties.
P1 vs AKG N20
The N20 has a slightly thinner bass presentation but with a sizable rise in sub bass. While mid bass is pretty quick, sub bass has extended decay and sounds a bit bloomier. This elevation and extended decay in sub bass make bass texturing a little less precise compared to the more even handed P1.
N20 male vocals are very clear and very detailed, if perhaps just a hair on the thinner side. By comparison the P1 is slightly richer and weightier without sounding chesty or too deep. Despite sounding a little thinner, N20 male vocals are placed pretty similarly to the P1. Female vocals sound a little more forward on the N20 with more upper midrange attack for a lighter, more energetic presentation. The upper midrange energy is excellent with distortion rock guitars, and N20 forte, allowing them to soar and sizzle. In comparison female vocals on the P1 sound a weightier and less demanding; distortion rock guitars sound fuller, weightier and more grounded.
The N20 has very good treble sparkle and energy without sounding piercing or sharp, injecting a sense of openness and air. While the N20 sounds brighter than the P1, the P1can sound crisper and sharper with some recordings. However, for most recordings, the P1sounds more laid back and relaxed in treble energy.
While the N20 is in the realm of neutrality, it comes across as slightly U shaped next to the warmer and more even handed P1. This open and airy response gives the N20 a much wider presentation than it does in height and depth. By comparison, the P1 sounds more realistically proportioned and noticeably deeper with more space around instruments- the effect is a more overt holographic image.
P1 vs PSB M4U-4
The PSB is a more deep bass forward presentation with a steep rise below 100 dB. Overall bass quantity is somewhat similar with the P1 but is distributed quite differently. The bass of the P1 is more balanced and even between high, mid and low bass, whereas the PSB can sound lacking in mid bass punch next to it’s plentiful and extended deep rumble. The PSB bass is also bloomier and lingers a good bit longer than the more nimble P1. By comparison, bass texture is more revealing in the P1 and a bit more soft, yet more forward in the PSB.
Male vocals on the PSB sound more forward than they do on the P1, however note weight is thinner. This difference in richness gives the P1 a more evocative performance, even if not quite as inmate sounding. Female vocals are also more forward on the PSB with greater upper midrange emphasis and energy. However, with this greater energy, there is also a hint of a metallic edge in the PSB, which can be heard in Lzzy Hale’s voice on Here’s To Us. Rock guitars are thinner and airier sounding with greater bite and crunch with the PSB, whereas the P1 presents those same guitars with as weightier, smoother and more grounded.
The PSB gives plenty of treble sparkle, much more-so than the P1, yet remains fatigue free. An even bigger difference is in treble timbre and realism. The PSB can sound fairly metallic and tinny at times, especially with silicone tips. By comparison, the P1 treble is smoother and more natural sounding, if a bit subdued next to the livelier PSB.
The PSB sounds wider left to right that it does in height and depth, with a slightly airy presentation. In contrast, the P1, while not as wide, sounds more evenly proportioned for a more life-like presentation. The difference in depth gives the P1 more precise placement in stage, as well as more separation between instruments.
*Originally posted on CYMBACAVUM.
MEE Audio has been without a flagship for a couple of years, since the discontinuation of the very well received A161p. The A161p was single armature design with a balanced signature leaning to the slightly warm side. The A161p, along with the venerable Audio Technica CK10, were my gateway in-ears into a more neutral frequency response, and accordingly preserve fond memory in my portable audio journey. Consequently, I’ve been looking forward to the day MEE Audio found a worthy replacement at the top of their line-up. The Pinnacle P1 has been over two years in the making, and at $199 msrp, is $100 more than their previous flagship. Can MEE Audio still still remain true to their reputation as one of the better bang for buck manufacturers out there?
DESIGN
The P1 features a proprietary 10mm dynamic driver of higher impedance (50 Ohms) and less sensitivity (96 dB) than your average in-ears. It’s constructed with a copper-clad aluminum voice coil for lower mass and faster driver control. In addition to this new custom driver, the P1 also utilizes a new proprietary acoustic diffuser and sound chamber. The acoustic diffuser is claimed to force high frequencies to resonate before reaching the ear, with a resulting effect that offers a smoother, yet more extended treble, that still maintains plenty of energy without the typical associated peaks and harshness. The most interesting aspect of this delivery system is that the driver and diffuser are not visible in the nozzle. If one were to remove the protective mesh from the top of the nozzle, you would see nothing but a clear path leading to the open of the housing chamber. In other words, the driver is mounted at an offset angle inside the chamber.BUILD & ACCESSORIES
The build quality of the P1 is very robust. The housings are die-cast from a zinc alloy with a polished, shiny appearance. The zinc alloy is said to be more rigid than aluminum and more impact resistant as well. While perhaps not quite as light weight as aluminum, it is lighter than stainless steel. The polished zinc alloy has an aged brass appearance. The housings are put together from two pieces, with the nozzles made from a separate metal. There appears to be a very small pinhole pressure equalizing vent on the underside of the housings, where the backside of the driver should be facing.The P1 comes with two cables: a high grade audio cable made of silver-plated copper and an Android/iOS compatible microphone cable. Both cables utilize the mmcx connection. The cables feel more robust than your average stock cable; they are thicker, yet very pliable. They feature a twisted cable design that features a case friendly right angle plug and sturdy Y-split with neck cinch. The high grade audio cable is the same aged brass color of the P1 zinc alloy housings. Using this cable gives the overall appearance a kind of ‘mid-century modern’ design aesthetic.
The rest of the accessories round out as follows: shirt clip, 6 pair of silicone tips, 3 pair of Comply tips, 1/4” adapter and carrying case. The carrying case is an elegant, leather style case with a magnetic closure flap. The flap is topped off with a “Pinnacle” metal badge in the same aged brass look with inscribed serial number.
SOUND
At the onset of my listening experience, I utilized the Comply tips but as I continued to listen over the coming weeks, I ended up reverting to the stock silicone single flange tips. Listening was conducted on an iPhone 6S+, Mezzo Soprano modded AK120, and AK100 feeding a Chord Mojo.The overall sound signature of the P1 is that of a slightly downward slopping frequency response. The P1 is warm and smooth with good clarity. It delivers high levels of resolution with impressive driver control. The most notable feature of performance is its staging properties, which stand head and shoulders above most closed in-ears and rival, if not surpass, many back vented designs.
Bass is moderately boosted- bassheads will find it too light and your most ardent neutrality seekers will find it too boosted. The boost is centered around 150 Hz and remains strong until about 40 Hz before starting to significantly roll off. The P1 driver sounds pretty quick, especially when compared to other dynamic driver models which tend to extend decay much longer. Texturing is excellent with high levels of bass resolution. Notes are on the thicker side with a naturally rich and reverberant tone.
The lower midrange is full and delivers a very engaging and evocative male vocal. While there is a dip in the middle/upper midrange that gives some distance to the listener, the P1is still able to convey very good vocal intimacy. This dip also gives a slightly laid back and fuller nature to female vocals for less energy than in-ears with a more forward upper midrange. However, the upper midrange is rising by the time lower treble kicks in, so rock guitars still have pleasing bite and crunch but with a fuller, more rounded presentation.
The P1 treble is best described as smooth yet crisp. After a rise in lower treble, it is quite laid back from about 6k to 8K, where it peaks again in middle treble and stays pretty present through upper treble with very good extension. This treble response seems to correlate fairly well with the manufacturer’s claims. Treble weight and tonality are slightly on the thin side due to the greater upper treble presence, however resolution and low level detail are very good without harness or being overly forward in the mix.
Staging properties of the P1 are simply fantastic. It is not an ‘airy’ in-ear, yet it’s able to present a class leading spaciousness with strong ambient cues within the stage. There is a great sense of blackness around instruments, giving everything room to stretch and breathe. You really do get a strong sense of instrument placement and room size in proportion to the instruments. Height, width and depth are all really very good with one of the best three dimensional presentations on the market for in-ears. I really have to think the offset angle of the driver to the nozzle and the acoustic diffuser play a significant role in the perception of stage, especially in a closed design. It’s not something you have to concentrate on but is readily noticeable upon first listen.
P1 vs Etymotic ER-4S
The ER-4S bass sounds quite light and tails off several decibels as it descends into sub bass. However, it is excellently textured despite being low level in the presentation. Bass speed doesn’t seem overly fast like some balanced armatures, and can sound surprisingly natural during bass heavier masterings. Surprisingly the P1 is more difficult to drive than the ER-4S, requiring quite a bit more volume to reach the same SPL. In comparison, the P1 bass is more visceral, carrying a stronger bass line with more rumble and extension in deep bass. While the P1 isn’t drastically bassier, the difference is certainly palpable when the recording calls for it. The other significant difference is in the longer decay of the P1. While the P1may be considered quick for a dynamic, it does linger noticeably longer than the ER-4S.
The Ety midrange is quite clear with a noticeable tilt towards the upper midrange. Male vocals, while very resolving, are a bit on the thin side and slightly under weighted. The upper midrange tilt makes for very transparent female vocals full of raw energy and power. The ER-4S neither emphasizes, nor glosses over sibilance; you really feel like you’re getting what the recording is delivering. The ER-4S is forward in nature, providing an intimate vocal performance that’s very engaging. On the flip side the Ety can sound overly forward in guitar driven rock, taking the listener to the brink with thin and edgy distortion rock guitars.
The P1 midrange eschews some clarity for fullness and richness. Male vocals are clearly weightier and more powerful, without sacrificing resolution, and exhibiting wonderful texture and emotion. The P1 is nowhere as forward in the upper midrange and female vocals exhibit less energy and more weight. Rock guitars have good bite and crunch but don’t quite soar, as they are grounded with a fairly full lower midrange. The end result is a much more forgiving presentation than the Ety.
The ER-4S treble is one of my favorite. Unlike it’s upper midrange, it’s treble is neither hot nor laid back. It has excellent balance, timbre and sparkle, yet remains effortlessly smooth. Extension is also top notch as well. In companion, the P1 treble is not quite as evenly presented. There is more lower treble presence before a similar Ety dip in the transition from lower to middle treble. The P1 treble sounds crisper and not quite as smooth as the Ety. Extension seems fairly comparable between the two, which is to say, very good.
The ER-4S is not really known for its spacial qualities and as such sounds a bit flat in depth and height but has acceptable width. The presentation is very forward and close to the listener. As such, while imaging is excellent form left to right, there’s not much to speak of front to back. Even though the top end sounds open, the single driver delivers a more organic stage and doesn’t have the instrument separation that many multi-balanced armature designs portray.
The P1, while fuller sounding, presents things further back from the listener compared to the Ety. It sounds much larger in all directions, particularly in depth. It’s more reverberant and spacious sounding with strong ambient queues reminiscent of a concert hall type presentation. While similar to the Ety’s organic presentation, the P1 injects more space/blackness between instruments for much more lifelike proportions.
P1 vs FLC Technology FLC8S
FLC8S with the following filter choices: Clear ULF, Clear LF and Gold MF/HF
This set up was chosen to give the FLC8 the most linear and neutral frequency response possible with the filter choices available.
The FLC8S bass extends very deep and is still strong at 30 Hz in this set up. It has very satisfying rumble and impact. Bass feels linear between mid and upper bass and finishes with a rise in sub bass. As a whole it feels a little enhanced over neutral. Bass texturing is very good and decay sounds natural. Overall the FLC8S bass presence is pleasing with a healthy sprinkle of fun. At first blush, overall bass levels of the P1 sound fairly similar to the FLC8S but upon closer inspection, the FLC8S has a good bit more rumble, while the P1bass feels fuller and richer. In overall bass speed, I’d give the nod to the P1 as it feels just a bit snappier.
Both have fairly full bodied male vocals with the P1 being overall richer and fuller. The FLC8S is more pronounced in upper midrange presence, producing more energy for female vocals and, at times, can accentuate sibilance compared to the smoother P1. Where the FLC8 leans a bit more analytical, pushing details forward, the P1 produces more depth and vocal emotion. This same difference translates to the presentation of distortion guitars- the P1 has a thicker more robust guitar tone, and the FLC8S is slightly lighter and thinner but with cleaner overall note for more palpable rock guitar bite and crunch.
While both treble presentations are crisp, the FLC8S produces more sparkle and air with greater presence in the mix. For the most, part the FLC8S treble remains fatigue free with the exception of some accentuated sibilance mentioned before. While the P1 can’t match this more open and airy sound, it remains smoother for a more laid back listen.
The open and airy presentation of the FLC8S is above average in all directions with a very pleasing and open presentation. Even without the FLC8S sense of air, the P1 still sounds somehow larger. The sense of depth is more tangible, more three dimensional. The P1 puts more blackness between instruments, allowing the mind to expand the dimensions of the stage, giving more precise placement in space from front to back.
P1 vs Jays Q-Jays (v2)
The Q-Jays have a pretty large rise in deep bass with less mid and upper bass presence. In direct comparison, the Q-Jays bass sounds thinner in the upper end with less impact, but rumble is much more readily apparent. The dynamic driver of the P1 is more overt in texturing, displaying a more nuanced detailing in bass. It also has a more natural timbre and decay next to the slightly speedier dual balanced armatures of the Q-Jays.
Male vocals on the Q-Jays sound thinner and recessed next to the P1 but they aren’t necessarily thin on their own. The Q-Jays contain good heft but overall just fall short in richness and intimacy when compared to the P1. Female vocals also sound a bit thinner and more recessed next to the P1. The Q-Jays definitely sounds V shaped with a greater perception of clarity next to the meatier P1. If not worn deep enough, the Q-Jays can accentuate sibilance pretty strongly. With deeper fit it falls to more tolerable levels, although recordings with heavy sibilance are still a bit tough.
The Q-Jays have quite a bit of treble presence. After it’s dip in the upper midrange, it begins a steady climb from about 5k all the way through a fairly large peak around 9k. Deeper fit helps to somewhat control the peaks but one needs to appreciate a brighter signature. Next to the P1, the Q-Jays treble is thinner and lighter in weight with the P1 sounding more balanced and even across it’s upper frequency response. Where the P1 is built for longer listening sessions the Q-Jays are built for excitement.
The Q-Jays much brighter presentation, while airier and plenty wide, sounds overall flatter and smaller next to the P1. The P1 has much more space between instruments with a much greater and obvious sense of depth and height. While the Q-Jays are faster and more precise in stoping and starting, the P1’s reverberation and sense of ambiance is just simply more realistic in staging and imaging properties.
P1 vs AKG N20
The N20 has a slightly thinner bass presentation but with a sizable rise in sub bass. While mid bass is pretty quick, sub bass has extended decay and sounds a bit bloomier. This elevation and extended decay in sub bass make bass texturing a little less precise compared to the more even handed P1.
N20 male vocals are very clear and very detailed, if perhaps just a hair on the thinner side. By comparison the P1 is slightly richer and weightier without sounding chesty or too deep. Despite sounding a little thinner, N20 male vocals are placed pretty similarly to the P1. Female vocals sound a little more forward on the N20 with more upper midrange attack for a lighter, more energetic presentation. The upper midrange energy is excellent with distortion rock guitars, and N20 forte, allowing them to soar and sizzle. In comparison female vocals on the P1 sound a weightier and less demanding; distortion rock guitars sound fuller, weightier and more grounded.
The N20 has very good treble sparkle and energy without sounding piercing or sharp, injecting a sense of openness and air. While the N20 sounds brighter than the P1, the P1can sound crisper and sharper with some recordings. However, for most recordings, the P1sounds more laid back and relaxed in treble energy.
While the N20 is in the realm of neutrality, it comes across as slightly U shaped next to the warmer and more even handed P1. This open and airy response gives the N20 a much wider presentation than it does in height and depth. By comparison, the P1 sounds more realistically proportioned and noticeably deeper with more space around instruments- the effect is a more overt holographic image.
P1 vs PSB M4U-4
The PSB is a more deep bass forward presentation with a steep rise below 100 dB. Overall bass quantity is somewhat similar with the P1 but is distributed quite differently. The bass of the P1 is more balanced and even between high, mid and low bass, whereas the PSB can sound lacking in mid bass punch next to it’s plentiful and extended deep rumble. The PSB bass is also bloomier and lingers a good bit longer than the more nimble P1. By comparison, bass texture is more revealing in the P1 and a bit more soft, yet more forward in the PSB.
Male vocals on the PSB sound more forward than they do on the P1, however note weight is thinner. This difference in richness gives the P1 a more evocative performance, even if not quite as inmate sounding. Female vocals are also more forward on the PSB with greater upper midrange emphasis and energy. However, with this greater energy, there is also a hint of a metallic edge in the PSB, which can be heard in Lzzy Hale’s voice on Here’s To Us. Rock guitars are thinner and airier sounding with greater bite and crunch with the PSB, whereas the P1 presents those same guitars with as weightier, smoother and more grounded.
The PSB gives plenty of treble sparkle, much more-so than the P1, yet remains fatigue free. An even bigger difference is in treble timbre and realism. The PSB can sound fairly metallic and tinny at times, especially with silicone tips. By comparison, the P1 treble is smoother and more natural sounding, if a bit subdued next to the livelier PSB.
The PSB sounds wider left to right that it does in height and depth, with a slightly airy presentation. In contrast, the P1, while not as wide, sounds more evenly proportioned for a more life-like presentation. The difference in depth gives the P1 more precise placement in stage, as well as more separation between instruments.
CONCLUSION
MEE Audio has brought a worthy replacement to the flagship spot in their line-up. While perhaps deviating a little further from a neutral frequency response, for a warmer, fuller, more commercially acceptable sound, the P1 brings substantial and impressive improvements to spacial and staging performance. The P1 is both a joy to use and listen to, as well as provide all the visual aesthetics a flagship should have. I believe MEE Audio has been successful in providing great bang for buck performance and value in a $199 in-ear and the Pinnacle P1 is something I can easily recommend.*Originally posted on CYMBACAVUM.
Note: The D2 used for this review was graciously supplied free of charge.
The Alpha & Delta D2 is the newest in-house branded in-ear from Lend Me UR ears. Marketed for active users, the D2 is very affordable at an MSRP of only $25.92. It’s IPX4 sweat resistant design makes it perfect for outdoors, workouts and pool/beach-side usage.
Specifications:
• Driver unit: 10mm dynamic driver
• Impedance: 16 ohm
• Rated power: 1mW
• Frequency Response: 10 Hz- 20 Khz
• Speaker Sensitivity: 95 +/- db/ mW
• Cord Length: 1.2m
• Plug: 3.5 mm
Design
The housings are of an ergonomic design, made to fit flush in the ear. The housings are covered in a soft-touch, smooth rubberized plastic coating. Only time will tell how long this coating holds up but the effect is very pleasing. The D2 is meant to be worn over-the-ear and comes with pre-formed ear hooks built into the cable. Housing strain reliefs appear to be robust and durable, as is the Y-split. Thankfully the D2 cable has neck slider to adjust the cable to preference. Overall the cable is on the thin side and is plenty flexible. Lastly, it is terminated in a tiny 45 degree case friendly plug.
Accessories include a carrying case, shirt clip, several single flange, dual flange and foam tips.
Fit is snug and easy, due to the smooth and light weight housings. The ergonomic design has a broad angled nozzle that may cause some issues with achieving a perfect seal. My ear canals are fairly straight and nozzles with this much angle are somewhat difficult of me seal properly. Luckily I happen to prefer a loose seal with the D2, due to the tuning - more on that shortly. For normal activity the fit is comfortable and pleasing.
I had hoped, with the IPX4 rating, that the D2 would be an option for mowing use. I like to use in-ears underneath noise reducing ear muffs, while using my riding lawn mower. While the housings of the D2 or very smooth, they do have a large surface area that comes in contact with the ear. The very bumpy ride of my yard proved a bit too fatiguing with the D2 over the 2 hour time span it takes me to complete mowing. Other than this specific use case, The D2 remained comfortable over extended periods.
Sound
The sound of the D2 is a bass first signature. With a full seal, the bass is quite prominent and strong. It reaches deep, with lots of rumble, but peaks and is strongest in mid bass. Impact is definitely king. Lower mids are full and forward, if a bit aggressive. Vocals are warm and intimate, as well as engaging. Upper mids take a bit of a back seat, which makes distortion rock guitars rounded and smooth. The D2 is definitely more tailored towards male vocals than female with it’s lower midrange voicing. Treble is also a bit on the laid back and smooth side but does rebound with some sparkle and presence after the upper mid dip. Due to the D2’s bassy nature, I prefer the loser seal the nozzle angle affords me.
TLDR: Prominent mid bass focus, forward and full lower mids, laid back upper mid and fairly smooth treble.
Comparisons
D2 vs Shozy Zero
The Zero comes across as V shaped with plentiful but not overbearing bass, that is tilted towards deep bass. It has a supple, bouncy nature with plenty of rumble. Treble is pretty easy going and laid back, with just enough lower and middle treble to provide some sparkle; afterwards it rolls off fairly quickly. The midrange, while somewhat recessed, is full, clear and transparent with a hint of sweetness.
In comparison, the D2 comes across as much bassier, with more emphasis in mid and upper bass. The result is a warmer, harder hitting bass. Due to the downward sloping frequency response of the D2, treble presence takes a back seat to the more forward bass and midrange. Vocals are more forward than the Zero but less clear and transparent with much greater warmth and fullness.
D2 vs Brainwavz S0
The S0 is a bassy and very smooth signature. Bass is full with loads of rumble and extended decay, supporting a thick and rich note. While lower mids are also full, middle and upper mids are recessed for a laid back vocal. Treble is easy going and laid back with just a hint of sparkle.
Similarly to the S0, the D2 is just as bassy, if not a bit more but is tilted more towards mid bass for harder hitting impact. The D2 has less decay for a slightly faster bass and less warm vocal. Vocals are fuller and more forward, as well as slightly clearer. Treble, while laid back as well, does have a hair more brightness and sparkle.
D2 vs Samsung Quadbeat 3
The Quadbeat is a pretty balanced signature with a prodigious sub bass lift. Otherwise mid and upper bass are balanced with it’s midrange and treble. The large sub bass lift can make it feel lacking in mid bass impact at times. Vocals are neutrally placed with very good clarity and definition. Treble is neither bright nor laid back with average sparkle and above average timbre.
Next to the Quadbeat 3, the D2 is a veritable bass machine with much harder hitting impact and overall bass presence. Notes are much thicker and fuller than on the Quadbeat. The D2 pushes vocals much more forward as well, although with less overall clarity. Treble isn’t as bright and is further back in the mix, with less realistic timbre, in direct comparison.
D2 vs Zero Audio Tenore
The Tenore is a warmish, downward sloping take on neutral. Relative to its signature, the Tenore has a full bass note, tilted more towards deep bass. Similar to the Quadbeat 3, Tenore vocals are neither recessed nor forward but do carry slightly more weight and warmth. The treble of the Tenore is very smooth and extended, if just slightly laid back.
In comparison, the D2 is warmer and a good bit bassier, again with more emphasis in mid bass but similar amounts of rumble. Overall note weight is fuller and richer. Vocals on the D2 are more forward and the midrange is more aggressive overall. While both have a laid back treble, the D2 seems is even more so, yet isn’t quite as smooth and peak free as the Tenore.
Conclusion
For less than $26 dollars, there really isn’t anything to complain about, unless perhaps you happen to be looking for more treble and less bass. The D2 is an easy to please, bassy, all rounder that is nearly perfect for those sweaty and humid activities.
The Alpha & Delta D2 is the newest in-house branded in-ear from Lend Me UR ears. Marketed for active users, the D2 is very affordable at an MSRP of only $25.92. It’s IPX4 sweat resistant design makes it perfect for outdoors, workouts and pool/beach-side usage.
Specifications:
• Driver unit: 10mm dynamic driver
• Impedance: 16 ohm
• Rated power: 1mW
• Frequency Response: 10 Hz- 20 Khz
• Speaker Sensitivity: 95 +/- db/ mW
• Cord Length: 1.2m
• Plug: 3.5 mm
Design
The housings are of an ergonomic design, made to fit flush in the ear. The housings are covered in a soft-touch, smooth rubberized plastic coating. Only time will tell how long this coating holds up but the effect is very pleasing. The D2 is meant to be worn over-the-ear and comes with pre-formed ear hooks built into the cable. Housing strain reliefs appear to be robust and durable, as is the Y-split. Thankfully the D2 cable has neck slider to adjust the cable to preference. Overall the cable is on the thin side and is plenty flexible. Lastly, it is terminated in a tiny 45 degree case friendly plug.
Accessories include a carrying case, shirt clip, several single flange, dual flange and foam tips.
Fit is snug and easy, due to the smooth and light weight housings. The ergonomic design has a broad angled nozzle that may cause some issues with achieving a perfect seal. My ear canals are fairly straight and nozzles with this much angle are somewhat difficult of me seal properly. Luckily I happen to prefer a loose seal with the D2, due to the tuning - more on that shortly. For normal activity the fit is comfortable and pleasing.
I had hoped, with the IPX4 rating, that the D2 would be an option for mowing use. I like to use in-ears underneath noise reducing ear muffs, while using my riding lawn mower. While the housings of the D2 or very smooth, they do have a large surface area that comes in contact with the ear. The very bumpy ride of my yard proved a bit too fatiguing with the D2 over the 2 hour time span it takes me to complete mowing. Other than this specific use case, The D2 remained comfortable over extended periods.
Sound
The sound of the D2 is a bass first signature. With a full seal, the bass is quite prominent and strong. It reaches deep, with lots of rumble, but peaks and is strongest in mid bass. Impact is definitely king. Lower mids are full and forward, if a bit aggressive. Vocals are warm and intimate, as well as engaging. Upper mids take a bit of a back seat, which makes distortion rock guitars rounded and smooth. The D2 is definitely more tailored towards male vocals than female with it’s lower midrange voicing. Treble is also a bit on the laid back and smooth side but does rebound with some sparkle and presence after the upper mid dip. Due to the D2’s bassy nature, I prefer the loser seal the nozzle angle affords me.
TLDR: Prominent mid bass focus, forward and full lower mids, laid back upper mid and fairly smooth treble.
Comparisons
D2 vs Shozy Zero
The Zero comes across as V shaped with plentiful but not overbearing bass, that is tilted towards deep bass. It has a supple, bouncy nature with plenty of rumble. Treble is pretty easy going and laid back, with just enough lower and middle treble to provide some sparkle; afterwards it rolls off fairly quickly. The midrange, while somewhat recessed, is full, clear and transparent with a hint of sweetness.
In comparison, the D2 comes across as much bassier, with more emphasis in mid and upper bass. The result is a warmer, harder hitting bass. Due to the downward sloping frequency response of the D2, treble presence takes a back seat to the more forward bass and midrange. Vocals are more forward than the Zero but less clear and transparent with much greater warmth and fullness.
D2 vs Brainwavz S0
The S0 is a bassy and very smooth signature. Bass is full with loads of rumble and extended decay, supporting a thick and rich note. While lower mids are also full, middle and upper mids are recessed for a laid back vocal. Treble is easy going and laid back with just a hint of sparkle.
Similarly to the S0, the D2 is just as bassy, if not a bit more but is tilted more towards mid bass for harder hitting impact. The D2 has less decay for a slightly faster bass and less warm vocal. Vocals are fuller and more forward, as well as slightly clearer. Treble, while laid back as well, does have a hair more brightness and sparkle.
D2 vs Samsung Quadbeat 3
The Quadbeat is a pretty balanced signature with a prodigious sub bass lift. Otherwise mid and upper bass are balanced with it’s midrange and treble. The large sub bass lift can make it feel lacking in mid bass impact at times. Vocals are neutrally placed with very good clarity and definition. Treble is neither bright nor laid back with average sparkle and above average timbre.
Next to the Quadbeat 3, the D2 is a veritable bass machine with much harder hitting impact and overall bass presence. Notes are much thicker and fuller than on the Quadbeat. The D2 pushes vocals much more forward as well, although with less overall clarity. Treble isn’t as bright and is further back in the mix, with less realistic timbre, in direct comparison.
D2 vs Zero Audio Tenore
The Tenore is a warmish, downward sloping take on neutral. Relative to its signature, the Tenore has a full bass note, tilted more towards deep bass. Similar to the Quadbeat 3, Tenore vocals are neither recessed nor forward but do carry slightly more weight and warmth. The treble of the Tenore is very smooth and extended, if just slightly laid back.
In comparison, the D2 is warmer and a good bit bassier, again with more emphasis in mid bass but similar amounts of rumble. Overall note weight is fuller and richer. Vocals on the D2 are more forward and the midrange is more aggressive overall. While both have a laid back treble, the D2 seems is even more so, yet isn’t quite as smooth and peak free as the Tenore.
Conclusion
For less than $26 dollars, there really isn’t anything to complain about, unless perhaps you happen to be looking for more treble and less bass. The D2 is an easy to please, bassy, all rounder that is nearly perfect for those sweaty and humid activities.
Rhapsodio Solar
Note: The custom in-ear in this review was provided at a discounted rate.
Rhapsodio is an up and coming manufacturer of both custom in-ears and custom-like universals. The owner and primary voice of customer service, Sammy, is a very friendly and passionate audiophile, who is quick to respond to inquiries and questions, particularly over Facebook messenger, which seems to be the communication method of choice. While not necessarily a new company (Sammy and team have 3+ years in business), it wasn’t until the introduction of the Solar, that word of Rhapsodio really started to take off on Head-Fi. Based in Hong Kong, they have been hard at work revamping the lineup and bringing new and different models to light, such as the Rti2- incorporating dual dynamics into a hybrid design, along with the aforementioned Solar- which contains 10 balanced armatures. Most recently they’ve even introduced a new single dynamic flagship, in the form of the Galaxy, an UltraMag II generation 10.3mm dynamic housed in an all metal, ergonomic enclosure.
Design, Build & Accessories
The Solar comes in both custom form and the custom-like universal form. The universal differentiates itself from the full custom with a metal nozzle and mesh screen that covers the opening. The model used for this review was the full custom version.
Universal Example (courtesy Rhapsodio)
Manufacturer Specs:
- 4-way passive crossover design
- 10 balanced armature drivers (2 tweeters, 2 high, 4 mid, 2 bass)
- Frequency response: 20 ~ 20,000 Hz
- Impedance: 26ohm
- Bundles with Pandora Sound SPC/OCC CM Cable
- 1-year international warranty
Rhapsodio offers many finish option for both their custom and universal offerings. There are multiple base colors that can be chosen, along with faceplate finishes like wood, carbon fiber, metal and gold flake. The website’s product page shows just a few of the more popular options. A further endless array of options can be seen on the photo section of their Facebook page: www.facebook.com/rhapsodiohk
Goldflake Custom (Courtesy Rhapsodio)
The custom version comes standard with the Pandora cable. The Pandora is made from silver plated copper, contains four conductors and is finished in a round style braid. The conductor’s outer sleeve finish is very peculiar. It almost feels like its part leather- you detect what feel like little fibers, just like the backside of a leather strap, when you run your fingers across its surface. It’s a rather strange sensation but I found I really enjoyed the uniqueness of this custom cable. The Pandora is also finished with a memory section for over the ear wear. The memory section does not contain a wire but is more of a preformed section to prevent the cable from flopping off the ear. Also included was a cable snap to keep the cable in a wound position when storing. Both aesthetics and usability are very good.
Rhapsodio supplied the Solar in their newest case design. The case is designed for storage, rather than carrying around in your back pack, much less your trousers. To say the new case is robust and sturdy would be an understatement. While being absurdly over-sized (it looks as if it could store a brick), it contains a Nerf factory of protective foam- this is the ‘Fort Knox’ of protection.
Sound
The overall signature is bass forward with a very full lower midrange. Bass texturing is brought to the forefront. Bombastic and powerful, the bass absolutely slams with impact. Vocals are very full bodied with great heft and emotion- romantic and thunderous are descriptors I’d heavily associate with the Solar. Treble is weighty with some sparkle but laid back for an easy going, long term listen. In fact, I would dub Solar as the bass lovers’ audiophile in-ear.
Comparisons
Solar vs Ultimate Ears Reference Monitor (discontinued; replaced by UERR $999)
...a tabernacle of indulgence
Next to the UERM, the Solar is practically a bass monster. The difference is rather stark. Solar is a thunderstorm of power and authority next to the leaner, seemingly more polite bass of the UERM. The UERM bass has always held very good texture for me but Solar pushes bass texture to the forefront, and it really takes a moment for the brain to adjust to the UERM when coming directly from the Solar. The one trait in bass they both share is a slight tilt towards mid bass over sub bass, however with the boost Solar has, there is plenty of sub bass rumble as well. While the UERM bass is about precision over presence, Solar’s bass is very much in control and doesn’t sound boomy or loose, even at such great quantity.
The lush lower midrange of the Solar is thicker, richer and more forward than the lower midrange of the UERM. Both are slightly laid back in the middle to upper midrange around 2k, but Solar bounces back a bit sooner after 3k. The lower midrange prominence and previously described dip, give Solar a slightly recessed vocal compared to the more linear UERM, but it also gives Solar a nice forward projection- giving it the ability for a slightly more out of head presentation. Midrange resolution is the UERM specialty and Solar certainly holds its own. When it comes to resolution, Solar doesn’t shy away from pushing small details to the forefront. Like everything else about the Solar, details are easily heard, bold in presence and projection. The UERM is more nuanced, almost delicate in comparison.
The light airiness and crispness of the UERM treble is again in stark contrast to the weightier, smoother treble of Solar. The Solar cannot be construed as airy- whereas distortion guitars soar to weightless heights with the UERM, the Solar is more about the grit, the grim and the undulating rhythm of drop D tuning. If some feel the UERM can be a bit on the analytical side, then Solar is built for long term, fatigue free treble listening.
If the UERM is an outside, open air venue, Solar is a tabernacle of indulgence where the whiskey flows and inhibitions are abandoned. While the UERM is much wider, Solar is not only much deeper but also has more forward projection and sounds a bit taller in direct comparison. The Solar’s depth helps to give a more precise instrument placement but the UERM has more air between instruments for more separation and space. The sonic images are about as different as they come.
Solar vs Empire Ears Zeus (pre revision $2099)
...powerful and thunderous
Bass is the Solar specialty. It is both powerful and thunderous, and impact as well as rumble can be quite vociferous. Texture is really top notch as well,l and overall bass balance is slightly tilted towards mid and upper bass. Zeus, however, seems to take the Solar’s specialty and ups the ante. Albeit much less in quantity, texture and rumble are simply excellent, with an overall tighter and more sub bass oriented bass presentation. The result is an even more nuanced, yet delightfully indulgent performance.
Zeus places the vocalist not just front and center, but almost as if you are next to the microphone, or possibly you are the microphone. In You Outta Know, Alanis is exceptionally clear and the depth of her anger is easily felt with Zeus. In comparison, Solar puts noticeably more distance between you and Alanis, and while she remains very clear, the sense of anger is nowhere near as palpable. It’s the equivalent difference in watching a performance and being subjugated to it.
Solar note thickness and weight is obviously greater than on Zeus, and lower midrange notes are a good bit fuller, richer and easily lusher as well. Male vocals are full bodied and bursting at the seams with power. Consequently, the Zeus midrange is overall more resolving by letting the listener more easily hear low level details.
Treble sparkle seems to be fairly similar between the two. Neither should be considered bright or airy but both possess a clean, weighty and articulate treble. The biggest difference will be in perception, due to the differences in note thickness and weight from bass through midrange. Being that the Solar is thicker and bassier, its treble presence seems a little more laid back next to Zeus. This again gives Zeus an upper hand in treble resolution, as it isn’t competing as heavily against the lower and middle ranges, and allows the listener to more easily hear low level detail.
The Solar is not particularly wide but doesn’t sound closed in either, a similar trait shared by Zeus as well. Solar has excellent depth compared to most TOTL offerings and height seems proportional to its width, however this is where Zeus really begins to stretch it legs and take things to a much higher level. Zeus depth and the layers within this depth are simply unmatched. While the Solar’s image is pretty precise within the stage, especially when listening for placement from front to back, separation just isn’t quite on the same level as Zeus. This is mainly due to the enhanced bass that seems to fill any sense of space and air between instruments, whereas Zeus seems to have a void of blackness between instruments. These elements of the Zeus performance help to push its overall sense of resolution and detailing to the next seemingly unattainable level.
Solar vs Perfect Seal AR6 ($950)
...a ruthless villain
The AR6 bass sounds incredibly linear up all the way through the midrange, in that no part of the bass response sounds louder than another- rumble and impact are on equal footing and extension reaches into the lowest registers. While the Solar has great rumble, it has a tilt towards mid bass impact. Both rumble and impact are bigger and bolder than the AR6 and extends just as deep. When listening to rap and hip hop, the Solar really begins to stretch its legs. The Solar hits with power and authority; it makes you move to the aggression and attitude in 100 Miles and Runnin’ and Straight Outta Compton. The AR6 is no slouch in this genre but the Solar takes the Spinal Tap route and turns it up a notch to 11. When it comes to bass, the Solar is A Ruthless Villain.
The AR6 has a very linear midrange with a slight peak in the upper midrange. Vocals are exceptionally clear and resolving. The AR6 really seems to excel in female vocals, bringing to life the emotion and energy in the upper midrange vocal registers. In contrast, the Solar lends itself to male vocals, due to its lusher lower midrange. Male vocals are delivered with more power, authority and evocative connection. If a song is about the emotional loss of a friend or loved one, the Solar can really make those words weigh heavy on the heart. On Solar, Brooks & Dunn’s Believe is an emotional roller coaster of grief and hope. At the moments of loss, Solar broods and wallows in the emotion; in the moments of hope and belief, Solar envelopes with the tingling of inspiration and hope. Solar lets you connect directly into the heart of Ronnie Dunn.
The AR6 treble has greater presence for a brighter and airier presentation. In comparison, the AR6 treble sounds thinner next to the weightier and thicker treble of the Solar. The AR6 treble is perhaps just a hair under a neutral presentation yet with plenty of sparkle, whereas the Solar treble is a good bit more laid back and easier going. Even though laid back in treble, it still has excellent tonality and articulation.
Solar vs 64 Audio U10 ($1399)
...denser, meatier and harder hitting
The U10 and Solar are both bassy signatures but where Solar’s bass is slightly tilted towards mid bass, the U10 bass is heavily tilted to deep bass. While I consider the U10 bassy, the Solar takes it the next level over the U10. Solar bass comes across as denser, meatier and harder hitting compared to the U10’s bass which is bouncier and feels lighter and airier in nature. The U10 creates more rumble, due to lessor mid bass presence, but bass textures are thrust more to the forefront with Solar’s bass presentation.
Both the U10 and Solar have full bodied lower midranges that make for intimate and engaging male vocals, although upon direct comparison, the Solar has a more evocative and romanticized presentation. Due to Solar’s greater mid bass, however, vocals are a little further back in the mix than the U10’s. Again the Solar’s midrange seems denser against the airier midrange of the U10. Typically an airier midrange is in reference to a brighter midrange with greater upper midrange emphasis, and while the U10 does have a larger peak from the upper midrange into the lower treble, it also seems to be impacted by the Adele model breathing more air in to the notes. While distortion guitars soar with more air in the U10, it can also exacerbate sibilance in tracks, whereas the heavier sounding Solar remains smoother, mitigating occurrences of sibilance.
The U10 has an obvious greater overall emphasis on treble. U10 treble notes are noticeably thinner next to the weightier treble of the Solar. While switching back and forth, Solar seems a good bit darker in contrast to the more U shaped U10. This is most obvious in the opening segment of David Lee Roth’s Just Like Paradise, which has a light, airy upper register that just makes me want to take the top down and cruise. The U10 does a better job recreating this airy ambiance with its brighter and sparklier upper end.
To some degree, the outside, open air venue versus the tabernacle of indulgence comparison of the UERM also applies here, albeit the U10 is not open sounding as the UERM. The U10 does a better job of placement from left to right and Solar has greater depth with more precise placement from front to back. The Adele module in the U10 just makes everything seem somehow lighter than air; a show in the clouds, especially against the heavier and darker backdrop of the Solar tabernacle.
Conclusion
Rhapsodio’s Solar certainly lives up to its status as a TOTL offering, and its technical prowess, on top of a bass forward signature, make it an intriguing model for bass-first loving audiophiles. While Solar doesn’t come cheap, the finishing options and custom-made stock cable make it a worthy accessorized high end custom in-ear.
shotgunshane
Don't take too much stock in the amount of stars. I'd prefer not to have that on the review and instead let the description speak for itself.
Note: MusicTeck graciously provided the Miracle and Maestro samples for review. Originally published at CYMBACAVUM.
Based in New Jersey, MusicTeck is an official distributor for some of the best-known manufacturers of high-end in-ear monitors, such as Unique Melody, Vision Ears, AAW, InEar and Earsonics to name a few. When they contacted CYMBACAVUM to see if we would be interested in reviewing two of Unique Melody’s in-ear monitors: the Miracle and the Maestro, of course we jumped at the opportunity.
Links to MusicTeck, their store and Unique Melody are located at the end of the review.
Unique Melody Miracle with stock cable
The monitors themselves are inside a velvet drawstring baggy, that fits very snuggly inside the hockey-puck carrying case. The carrying case is well padded but would benefit from being a little bigger, especially when the monitors are fitted with after market cables, which tend to be bulkier than stock cables. Both the Miracle and the Maestro come with a black PlasticsOne–style stock cable, which has a low profile, clear heat shrink Y-split and clear plastic tube neck slider. The cable is terminated in an old-style right-angle plug. This fatter plug is not smartphone case friendly. At the other end, the cable finishes in the standard two pin connectors that can fit the UM recessed housing sockets.
Unique Melody Maestro with Effect Audio cable, AK100 and Mojo
The universal monitors are finished in a glossy, black acrylic shell with black carbon fibre faceplates. The underside of the universal housings are inscribed with the model, serial number and either an L or R denoting the side. Customs will also include the owners initials. The nozzles appear to be Comply 500 series sized and are finished with a ridge to keep the tips from sliding off. The nozzle ending is open, without a screen or mesh to protect from debris or wax, so users should always keep the exposed bore tubes clear with the provided cleaning tool. The Miracle has two exposed bore tubes and the Maestro three. The shells for both the Miracle and Maestro universals appear to be the same all around size and they do stick out quite a bit when worn. They are anatomically ergonomic, though, so a very comfortable fit is easy to achieve.
2 Low, 2 Mid, 2 High
3 Way Crossover
18 Hz to 19 kHz
114 dB SPL Sensitivity
15.9 ohm Impedance
Pricing starts at $1049
4 Low, 4 Mid, 2 High, 2 Super High
4 Way Crossover
20 Hz to 20 kHz
109 dB SPL Sensitivity
20 ohm Impedance
Pricing starts at $1599
Miracle with hockey-puck carrying case
The Miracle provided is the newer V2 tuning. Over the years, one of the minor complaints from users was of a slightly dry midrange. The V2 tuning was created to address this specific feedback. In addition, it has been said the Maestro was tuned with the American market in mind. UM also has other regional specific tunings for their flagship models.
In general, the Miracle is a bit thinner sounding with more lower treble sparkle and a bit more peaky in treble overall. The Maestro has slightly more bass and sounds fuller, with weightier notes and a smoother top end. Having explored the provided stock tips and rummaged through my personal arsenal, my preferred tip for both is the Mee Audio dual flange silicone tip. The slightly deeper fit achieved makes for a bit smoother sonic presentation.
Bass
Bass of the Maestro is even front to back with a nice boost over neutral. Bass sounds full with equal impact and rumble. Texture is very good- the bottom end is clean, natural and tight without an overly “speedy” feel. Extension is strong to about 40 Hz before beginning its roll off. By comparison, the Miracle bass is slightly lower in quantity but with a rise in deep bass. The Miracle’s rumble slightly upstages it’s impact, and texture, while very good, is slightly behind the Maestro’s. Yet ,while the Miracle’s bass sounds thinner than the Maestro, it’s not lacking in any way and can be quite powerful when the track calls for it.
Midrange
Neither the Maestro nor the Miracle are what I’d call inmate in the midrange, although they are fully engaging. The Maestro midrange seems pretty neutrally placed- perhaps just a hair foward, but very clear and detailed. The full bass does a great job of staying out of the way- it doesn’t make male vocals too deep and chesty. The same is true of the Miracle– male vocals are clear and detailed. Placement is just behind the Maestro’s, with a slightly thinner note. When it comes to female vocals, both the UM models really shine and engage. Female vocals are energetic and demand your attention.
Treble
Treble on the Maestro is precise, crisp but overall smooth and fatigue free. The Miracle takes this same treble presentation and ever so slightly increases crispness and overall treble presence. UM tends to carry a house signature through their trebles with lower treble peaks around 6k. I found this in the Merlin and now in the Miracle and Maestro. Listening to some of my test tracks for sibilance, ringing and other treble piercing sounds, both the Miracle and Maestro tuning can slightly accentuate sibilance of some recordings, but a deeper fit mitigates this. I would expect the full custom to not accentuate sibilance at all, but simply render it as recorded. All in all, both models avoid over accentuating any recorded top end issues but they don’t gloss over them either. Both remain crisp and generally refined, perhaps ever so slightly erring on the forgiving side (the Maestro more-so than the Miracle).
A Miracle Born
Bass
The bass of the UERM is a knife of precision. Within double bass passages, it cuts with expert finesse, clean and precise with fantastic impact and timbre. The only real downside to the UERM bass is a slight lack of rumble in the deepest registers. Moving to the Maestro, bass notes are fuller with noticeably more rumble and longer decay. Those same double bass passages feel a little less clean and precise but have a more satisfying rumble and fullness to them. The Miracle on the other hand tends to fit in the space between the UERM and Maestro. It’s leaner presentation feels a bit quicker than the Maestro but is not quite up to the speed of the UERM. Miracle bass impact seems on par with the UERM but also has noticeably more deep rumble and decay.
Midrange
UERM vocals are very effortless- they are my benchmark for neutral vocals that sound both open and intimate, flowing with the emotion of the performance. Midrange resolution is a UERM forte, with excellent low level detail resolution. Midrange timbre is also top notch- distortion guitars soar with air and bite with tangible crunch. Acoustic guitars sound incredibly detailed with balance between the pluck of the stings and reverberation from the sound hole. By comparison, the Maestro vocals are moved slightly forward for a more intimate performance. With vocal oriented material, the Maestro can be more engaging with hints of romanticism, while never straying too far from a neutralish performance. Vocal resolution can stand toe to toe. Acoustic guitars are a little fuller with more reverberation from the sound hole and distortion guitars are slightly smoother and more grounded. The Miracle’s thinner note again seems to split the difference between the UERM and Maestro. The biggest difference is the Miracle vocals have the openness of the UERM but tend to accentuate sibilance slightly more than the other two.
Treble
The UERM treble is airy and sparkly, mainly due to a middle treble peak around 10k. This imparts the extremely open sound, that is seemingly without the borders that most closed iems tend to present. The treble is precise, highly resolving and tonally accurate, if a bit unforgiving. Extension is some of the best I’ve heard in higher end armature based monitors. Maestro treble can be a bit airy but is definitely much less so than the UERM. It’s lower treble peak contributes towards a slightly weightier treble that maintains very good tonality. Overall it’s treble is a bit smoother and noticeably more forgiving. Resolution is just as good, however, more subtle in presentation. Miracle treble falls more in-line with the Maestro than not. While somewhat airy, and more-so than the Maestro, it’s just not anywhere to the degree of the UERM. The increase in crispness and brightness of the Miracle over the Maestro, presents details in a slightly less subtle way.
Soundstage, Imaging and Separation
The UERM produces a very wide and airy presentation from left to right. It has excellent air and space between instruments that is far above average. Presentation is wider than it is at height and depth, and instrument placement is more precise on the horizontal axis than it is at placement in depth. The Maestro presentation is also larger than average, and while it doesn’t have the openness of the UERM, nor come close to it in width from left to right, it’s proportions sound more evenly matched. As a result, the Maestro sounds taller and deeper than the UERM; it has less air around instruments but they are easier to place from back to front. On the other hand, the Miracle sounds a little wider than than the Maestro but not as wide and as open as the UERM. The Miracle isn’t as tall or deep sounding as the Maestro and is more similar to the UERM presentation. Separation and placement are not quite as precise as the Maestro.
Bass
Bass on the AR6 sounds very linear and has excellent extension. Note thickness is close to the goldilocks zone, in that it doesn’t sound too thick or too thin most of the time. Bass texturing is top notch with perhaps just a tilt towards rumble over impact. In comparison, the Maestro note is thicker with more impact. Texturing is not quite as detailed as the AR6 but provides a fuller bass presentation with slightly more natural decay and reverberation. The Miracle, on the other hand, has more accentuated rumble down low than either. Note thickness is similar overall to the AR6 but the Miracle’s deep bass is noticeably bloomier with more decay for a slightly slower and more rounded bass presentation.
Midrange
The AR6 is every so slightly mid-centric with a tilt towards the upper midrange. This midrange tilt lends itself towards female vocals more-so than male. Intimately recorded male vocals can sound just a hair lightweight but resolution and clarity are fantastic. The AR6 really shines with female vocals, displaying great energy and focus. The AR6 doesn’t over emphasis sibilance, nor does it gloss over it but rather presents you with the truth of the recording. The Maestro is also very clear throughout the midrange but has a very small tilt towards the lower and middle midrange. Male vocals can sound more intimate than the AR6 for a more evocative experience and slightly accentuates sibilance over the AR6. In contrast, it doesn’t quite have the same energy in female vocals. Moving on to the Miracle, it has perhaps a hair more weight with male vocals than the AR6 but accentuates sibilance more than the other two. It likewise sounds a little closer to the AR6 when it comes to female vocal energy and focus but falling just short of the clarity and transparency of the AR6.
Treble
The AR6 treble is easy going with moderate air and brightness but not as bright as something like the UERM. Treble weight is a little on the thin side but is free of peaks, which lends heavily to it’s fatigue free presentation. The Maestro’s treble is not quite as present as the AR6 and while it’s treble peak gives it a crisp nature, it has a more realistic and weightier presentation. Similarly, the Maestro also remains fatigue free. In comparison, the Miracle is the brightest of the three, with it’s peak giving more overall treble presence. The Miracle treble isn’t quite as refined as the other two, giving up just a little bit of grain. Treble weight is similar to the Maestro, albeit even crisper and brighter in presentation.
Soundstage, Imaging and Separation
The AR6 forte is that it has one of the most well rounded presentations in size and scope. Staging proportions are surprisingly lifelike with realistic space around instruments, lending to it an almost holographic image. It’s not a grand presentation with class leading width but rather presents things like you are in the recording studio, with realistic and tangible proportions. The affect is more subtle than overt and noise from the outside environment can have a negative effect. In contrast, the Maestro and Miracle presentation is denser, noticeably fuller and more traditional in approach, which means the middle presentation happens more inside the head rather than in front of it. The boundaries are not closed in by any stretch, and the stereo image from left to right seemingly extends beyond the edges of the head. The effect of their staging is move overt and requires less concentration or less getting lost in the moment.
A Single Maestro
The Miracle remains a timeless classic that still maintains the performance to compete with many of the newer models on the market. However, the Maestro really takes the Unique Melody sound to the next level. It’s improved refinement, fuller note, overall balance and improved spaciousness makes for a superb top-of-the-line offering. It really is a true all rounder, sounding effortless and engaging with any genre thrown its way. It will be a favorite recommendation for those seeking for a high end monitor whose requirements match that of the Maestro’s talents.
For more information on Unique Melody products, please visit the new reorganized official Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/UniqueMelodyInternational/ and updated website: http://www.uniquemelody.co
Customers in the USA can visit http://www.musicteck.com for latest pricing and ordering information.
Based in New Jersey, MusicTeck is an official distributor for some of the best-known manufacturers of high-end in-ear monitors, such as Unique Melody, Vision Ears, AAW, InEar and Earsonics to name a few. When they contacted CYMBACAVUM to see if we would be interested in reviewing two of Unique Melody’s in-ear monitors: the Miracle and the Maestro, of course we jumped at the opportunity.
Links to MusicTeck, their store and Unique Melody are located at the end of the review.
Unique Melody Miracle with stock cable
INTRODUCING THE UNIQUE MELODY MIRACLE AND MAESTRO
Hand Crafted With Love
UM in-ear monitors, both universal and custom, come in a small (4”x4”x3”) black box that belies the size of the sound inside. The box greats you with an embossed Unique Melody logo, as well as the words, “IEMS INSIDE BOX” and “HAND CRAFTED WITH LOVE”. Once you slide the inner box out, you find a smaller box containing UM’s new hockey-puck-style carrying case and other accessories: airline adapter, 6.3mm adapter, cleaning tool, cleaning cloth and three sizes of tips (universals only) in both silicone and Comply foam. Also included is a card with serial number, manufacturing date, warranty period and UM contact info.The monitors themselves are inside a velvet drawstring baggy, that fits very snuggly inside the hockey-puck carrying case. The carrying case is well padded but would benefit from being a little bigger, especially when the monitors are fitted with after market cables, which tend to be bulkier than stock cables. Both the Miracle and the Maestro come with a black PlasticsOne–style stock cable, which has a low profile, clear heat shrink Y-split and clear plastic tube neck slider. The cable is terminated in an old-style right-angle plug. This fatter plug is not smartphone case friendly. At the other end, the cable finishes in the standard two pin connectors that can fit the UM recessed housing sockets.
Unique Melody Maestro with Effect Audio cable, AK100 and Mojo
The universal monitors are finished in a glossy, black acrylic shell with black carbon fibre faceplates. The underside of the universal housings are inscribed with the model, serial number and either an L or R denoting the side. Customs will also include the owners initials. The nozzles appear to be Comply 500 series sized and are finished with a ridge to keep the tips from sliding off. The nozzle ending is open, without a screen or mesh to protect from debris or wax, so users should always keep the exposed bore tubes clear with the provided cleaning tool. The Miracle has two exposed bore tubes and the Maestro three. The shells for both the Miracle and Maestro universals appear to be the same all around size and they do stick out quite a bit when worn. They are anatomically ergonomic, though, so a very comfortable fit is easy to achieve.
MIRACLE SPECIFICATIONS:
6 Balanced Armatures2 Low, 2 Mid, 2 High
3 Way Crossover
18 Hz to 19 kHz
114 dB SPL Sensitivity
15.9 ohm Impedance
Pricing starts at $1049
MAESTRO SPECIFICATIONS:
12 Balanced Armatures4 Low, 4 Mid, 2 High, 2 Super High
4 Way Crossover
20 Hz to 20 kHz
109 dB SPL Sensitivity
20 ohm Impedance
Pricing starts at $1599
Miracle with hockey-puck carrying case
MIRACLE VS MAESTRO
The Miracle provided is the newer V2 tuning. Over the years, one of the minor complaints from users was of a slightly dry midrange. The V2 tuning was created to address this specific feedback. In addition, it has been said the Maestro was tuned with the American market in mind. UM also has other regional specific tunings for their flagship models.
In general, the Miracle is a bit thinner sounding with more lower treble sparkle and a bit more peaky in treble overall. The Maestro has slightly more bass and sounds fuller, with weightier notes and a smoother top end. Having explored the provided stock tips and rummaged through my personal arsenal, my preferred tip for both is the Mee Audio dual flange silicone tip. The slightly deeper fit achieved makes for a bit smoother sonic presentation.
Bass
Bass of the Maestro is even front to back with a nice boost over neutral. Bass sounds full with equal impact and rumble. Texture is very good- the bottom end is clean, natural and tight without an overly “speedy” feel. Extension is strong to about 40 Hz before beginning its roll off. By comparison, the Miracle bass is slightly lower in quantity but with a rise in deep bass. The Miracle’s rumble slightly upstages it’s impact, and texture, while very good, is slightly behind the Maestro’s. Yet ,while the Miracle’s bass sounds thinner than the Maestro, it’s not lacking in any way and can be quite powerful when the track calls for it.
Midrange
Neither the Maestro nor the Miracle are what I’d call inmate in the midrange, although they are fully engaging. The Maestro midrange seems pretty neutrally placed- perhaps just a hair foward, but very clear and detailed. The full bass does a great job of staying out of the way- it doesn’t make male vocals too deep and chesty. The same is true of the Miracle– male vocals are clear and detailed. Placement is just behind the Maestro’s, with a slightly thinner note. When it comes to female vocals, both the UM models really shine and engage. Female vocals are energetic and demand your attention.
Treble
Treble on the Maestro is precise, crisp but overall smooth and fatigue free. The Miracle takes this same treble presentation and ever so slightly increases crispness and overall treble presence. UM tends to carry a house signature through their trebles with lower treble peaks around 6k. I found this in the Merlin and now in the Miracle and Maestro. Listening to some of my test tracks for sibilance, ringing and other treble piercing sounds, both the Miracle and Maestro tuning can slightly accentuate sibilance of some recordings, but a deeper fit mitigates this. I would expect the full custom to not accentuate sibilance at all, but simply render it as recorded. All in all, both models avoid over accentuating any recorded top end issues but they don’t gloss over them either. Both remain crisp and generally refined, perhaps ever so slightly erring on the forgiving side (the Maestro more-so than the Miracle).
A Miracle Born
SELECT COMPARISONS
MIRACLE & MAESTRO VS ULTIMATE EARS REFERENCE MONITOR
Bass
The bass of the UERM is a knife of precision. Within double bass passages, it cuts with expert finesse, clean and precise with fantastic impact and timbre. The only real downside to the UERM bass is a slight lack of rumble in the deepest registers. Moving to the Maestro, bass notes are fuller with noticeably more rumble and longer decay. Those same double bass passages feel a little less clean and precise but have a more satisfying rumble and fullness to them. The Miracle on the other hand tends to fit in the space between the UERM and Maestro. It’s leaner presentation feels a bit quicker than the Maestro but is not quite up to the speed of the UERM. Miracle bass impact seems on par with the UERM but also has noticeably more deep rumble and decay.
Midrange
UERM vocals are very effortless- they are my benchmark for neutral vocals that sound both open and intimate, flowing with the emotion of the performance. Midrange resolution is a UERM forte, with excellent low level detail resolution. Midrange timbre is also top notch- distortion guitars soar with air and bite with tangible crunch. Acoustic guitars sound incredibly detailed with balance between the pluck of the stings and reverberation from the sound hole. By comparison, the Maestro vocals are moved slightly forward for a more intimate performance. With vocal oriented material, the Maestro can be more engaging with hints of romanticism, while never straying too far from a neutralish performance. Vocal resolution can stand toe to toe. Acoustic guitars are a little fuller with more reverberation from the sound hole and distortion guitars are slightly smoother and more grounded. The Miracle’s thinner note again seems to split the difference between the UERM and Maestro. The biggest difference is the Miracle vocals have the openness of the UERM but tend to accentuate sibilance slightly more than the other two.
Treble
The UERM treble is airy and sparkly, mainly due to a middle treble peak around 10k. This imparts the extremely open sound, that is seemingly without the borders that most closed iems tend to present. The treble is precise, highly resolving and tonally accurate, if a bit unforgiving. Extension is some of the best I’ve heard in higher end armature based monitors. Maestro treble can be a bit airy but is definitely much less so than the UERM. It’s lower treble peak contributes towards a slightly weightier treble that maintains very good tonality. Overall it’s treble is a bit smoother and noticeably more forgiving. Resolution is just as good, however, more subtle in presentation. Miracle treble falls more in-line with the Maestro than not. While somewhat airy, and more-so than the Maestro, it’s just not anywhere to the degree of the UERM. The increase in crispness and brightness of the Miracle over the Maestro, presents details in a slightly less subtle way.
Soundstage, Imaging and Separation
The UERM produces a very wide and airy presentation from left to right. It has excellent air and space between instruments that is far above average. Presentation is wider than it is at height and depth, and instrument placement is more precise on the horizontal axis than it is at placement in depth. The Maestro presentation is also larger than average, and while it doesn’t have the openness of the UERM, nor come close to it in width from left to right, it’s proportions sound more evenly matched. As a result, the Maestro sounds taller and deeper than the UERM; it has less air around instruments but they are easier to place from back to front. On the other hand, the Miracle sounds a little wider than than the Maestro but not as wide and as open as the UERM. The Miracle isn’t as tall or deep sounding as the Maestro and is more similar to the UERM presentation. Separation and placement are not quite as precise as the Maestro.
MIRACLE & MAESTRO VS PERFECT SEAL AR6
Bass
Bass on the AR6 sounds very linear and has excellent extension. Note thickness is close to the goldilocks zone, in that it doesn’t sound too thick or too thin most of the time. Bass texturing is top notch with perhaps just a tilt towards rumble over impact. In comparison, the Maestro note is thicker with more impact. Texturing is not quite as detailed as the AR6 but provides a fuller bass presentation with slightly more natural decay and reverberation. The Miracle, on the other hand, has more accentuated rumble down low than either. Note thickness is similar overall to the AR6 but the Miracle’s deep bass is noticeably bloomier with more decay for a slightly slower and more rounded bass presentation.
Midrange
The AR6 is every so slightly mid-centric with a tilt towards the upper midrange. This midrange tilt lends itself towards female vocals more-so than male. Intimately recorded male vocals can sound just a hair lightweight but resolution and clarity are fantastic. The AR6 really shines with female vocals, displaying great energy and focus. The AR6 doesn’t over emphasis sibilance, nor does it gloss over it but rather presents you with the truth of the recording. The Maestro is also very clear throughout the midrange but has a very small tilt towards the lower and middle midrange. Male vocals can sound more intimate than the AR6 for a more evocative experience and slightly accentuates sibilance over the AR6. In contrast, it doesn’t quite have the same energy in female vocals. Moving on to the Miracle, it has perhaps a hair more weight with male vocals than the AR6 but accentuates sibilance more than the other two. It likewise sounds a little closer to the AR6 when it comes to female vocal energy and focus but falling just short of the clarity and transparency of the AR6.
Treble
The AR6 treble is easy going with moderate air and brightness but not as bright as something like the UERM. Treble weight is a little on the thin side but is free of peaks, which lends heavily to it’s fatigue free presentation. The Maestro’s treble is not quite as present as the AR6 and while it’s treble peak gives it a crisp nature, it has a more realistic and weightier presentation. Similarly, the Maestro also remains fatigue free. In comparison, the Miracle is the brightest of the three, with it’s peak giving more overall treble presence. The Miracle treble isn’t quite as refined as the other two, giving up just a little bit of grain. Treble weight is similar to the Maestro, albeit even crisper and brighter in presentation.
Soundstage, Imaging and Separation
The AR6 forte is that it has one of the most well rounded presentations in size and scope. Staging proportions are surprisingly lifelike with realistic space around instruments, lending to it an almost holographic image. It’s not a grand presentation with class leading width but rather presents things like you are in the recording studio, with realistic and tangible proportions. The affect is more subtle than overt and noise from the outside environment can have a negative effect. In contrast, the Maestro and Miracle presentation is denser, noticeably fuller and more traditional in approach, which means the middle presentation happens more inside the head rather than in front of it. The boundaries are not closed in by any stretch, and the stereo image from left to right seemingly extends beyond the edges of the head. The effect of their staging is move overt and requires less concentration or less getting lost in the moment.
A Single Maestro
CONCLUSION
…improved refinement, fuller note, overall balance and improved spaciousness
Offering a universal version is a great option for those that would rather not go through the custom process. Despite being on the large side, both universals proved to be very comfortable over longer listening sessions, including comparison sessions, which require inserting and removing them numerous times.The Miracle remains a timeless classic that still maintains the performance to compete with many of the newer models on the market. However, the Maestro really takes the Unique Melody sound to the next level. It’s improved refinement, fuller note, overall balance and improved spaciousness makes for a superb top-of-the-line offering. It really is a true all rounder, sounding effortless and engaging with any genre thrown its way. It will be a favorite recommendation for those seeking for a high end monitor whose requirements match that of the Maestro’s talents.
For more information on Unique Melody products, please visit the new reorganized official Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/UniqueMelodyInternational/ and updated website: http://www.uniquemelody.co
Customers in the USA can visit http://www.musicteck.com for latest pricing and ordering information.
PinkyPowers
Your description of the Maestro sounds a lot like my new Solars. Except with the vocal placement.
shotgunshane
I would say they both share a refined, smooth approach to treble but the custom Solar has fuller lower mids and is a good bit bassier.
Note: Perfect Seal graciously provided the AR6 in this review.
Perfect Seal Lab
oratories, based in Wichita Kansas, is a relatively new company in the increasingly popular custom in-ear market. The company is run by Mike Martinez, and while Perfect Seal might be new to the Head-Fi community, Mike is certainly not new to the industry. He previously worked for an early industry lab that made monitors for Sensaphonics and Fireside, in which everything was dynamic driver based at that time.
Before getting into the model being reviewed here, I wanted to share a Q&A I recently had with Mike, so he can shed a light on the Perfect Seal team and how he approaches the tunings that make up the Perfect Seal line-up:
Who are the team behind Perfect Seal Laboratories?
Mike: Currently we are a team of four. Myself, Dave, Brad and Brandi. Though I may use the term lightly, we all are musicians except Brandi. We have a really good thing going, every one is very reliable and that makes all the difference in the world.
How do you approach tuning a new design? Do you have target measurements or a specific sound signature in mind when you start designing an in-ear?
Mike: There are several ways and considerations into the approach of a new design. I like to start with a Diffuse Field curve then tweak things to my liking or toward whatever I feel the intended target may be wanting to hear.
Do you use specific songs or kinds of music to gauge the tuning direction when you are designing an in-ear? If so would you mind sharing a couple?
Mike: I do have specific songs I’ll use in the design and tuning of our units. I really don’t stick with one genre but will try several. A few bands I’ll use are Candlebox, Little Wayne, Charlie Daniels, Casey Donahew, and so on. There are certain artifacts that I’ll look for. I also like to use stuff I wrote and recorded because I obviously know the intended sound intimately.
What background do you bring to the industry that gives you a unique or different edge and/or sound?
Mike: Along with my music background, I bring my knowledge of various materials and modeling techniques. I have production methods that not too many are familiar with or even heard of. Some of which are in place and some just waiting to be incorporated.
Do you feel your line-up has a house sound or did you set out to have completely different sound in different models?
Mike: I hear a lot about “house sounds” but I don’t feel we have a house sound. I look to offer a wide range models that way anyone could fine something they prefer.
You offer some of your in-ears in silicone and acrylic. Are there any sound differences between the same model but built in each material? If so, to what would you attribute it?
Mike: There may be slight variations in sound between the same model being made in different materials. There could be a few reasons to explain this but my take is: 1. The material around the sound tube, insulating it. In a silicone unit, the entire run of the sound tube is in contact with the silicone. In an acrylic mold, the tube is usually in free air with canal portion of the tube encased in acrylic. 2. My second explanation is more of a theory that involves sound waves hitting the tip of the mold. A soft mold could possibly be dampening sound waves bouncing off of the eardrum while the hard mold may not be dampening them as much, causing piggyback signals or a slight difference in sound perception.
How would you describe your perfect sound signature?
Mike: My perfect sound signature is still evolving. The best way I could describe it is what some might describe as “V” shaped, but I wouldn’t call it that. I like sparkle in the highs (not fatiguing), clarity throughout the mid range and an elevated sub/low bass, not overly elevated, just enough to where it feels right in the mix. The AR6 has changed what I thought my ideal sound sig was, just wait until I merge the two
What are the biggest differences in your professional musician customers and audiophile customers?
Mike: There are musicians who just need a tool to hear a click or the band, so that’s pretty basic. Then you have musicians with more of an audiophile sense and they may want a higher fidelity sound. The biggest difference between the professional musicians and audiophiles that I noticed, believe it or not, has nothing to do with sound. It’s actually in how the CIEM looks. Audiophiles want wild colors, cool designs, and individuality built into their CIEM’s.
What is the most difficult part of your job/career?
Mike: That’s a tough one to answer, so maybe answering this question is, lol. Really though, it would be, being a salesman. I am not a salesman, I won’t try to convince anyone to buy our products, I simply answer any questions anyone would have about our products as honestly as I can, without adding all the extra polish to my words. I dislike being sold to, so I have no desire to push my products onto anyone else. I let people decide on their own, but I do understand in doing so, they sometimes get “sold” on another competitors products instead.
Who or what is your favorite band?
Mike: You saved the two hardest questions (for me) for last. I’m not sure that I have a favorite food, color, or band. I like so much that it’s really hard for me to choose. Lately I have been listening to a lot more alternative, Mumford and Sons, Muse, etc….
Fast forward to today, we have Mike crafting in-ears in both acrylic and silicone, with not only balanced armature designs with up to 8 drivers per side but also hybrid designs with both dynamic and balanced armature drivers. Perfect Seal also offers canal only shells, full custom shells and hard acrylic shells with soft canals. When it comes to options, no stone is left unturned.
Recently Mike has released a new series of custom in-ears: The Ambiance Series. The first release in this series is the new Perfect Seal Flagship, the AR6. The A and R stand for Ambiance Reference and the 6 is the balanced armature driver count. The AR6 was designed with soundstage and linear frequency response goals in mind, to wit, the marketing blurb on the website states, “experience superb clarity, awesome resolution and imaging”. The AR6 is offered in acrylic and silicone but Perfect Seal will need to see your impressions first before giving the thumbs up for a silicone build, as the canal pieces in silicone will need to be a little larger than in acrylic. This is due to the 4 sound bore design and the need for more space in silicone with that many bores. Pricing starts at $950 for acrylic and goes up from there.
Blue Purple and Green Purple Swirl on Gottlieb’s Cleopatra
Manufacturer Specs:
$950 Acrylic
I chose silicone for my set, as I’ve previously only had one other experience with silicone in-ears. Mike offers many possibilities when it comes to colors, designs and finishes; many of which aren’t really shown on the website, so it’s a good idea to contact Perfect Seal when ordering and discuss your aesthetic aspirations. I decided to go with a swirl of his ‘blue purple’ color along with the ‘green purple’ color. The dedicated AR6 thread on Head-Fi has some pictures of a beautiful orange acrylic set that is a must see!
Perfect Seal customs come with a customized S3 case, which is similar to an Otterbox. The customized foam insert has a slot for the cleaning tool, an open area to lay our wound cable and possibly a silica drying pod, as well as two small areas for each ear piece. The stock cable looks to be standard issue PlasticsOne Motion series cables, which comes with a 3.5mm right angle plug that is smart phone case friendly, SPC tinsel wire, rugged Y-split, neck slider and memory wire at the overmolded 2-pin connectors.
The AR6 has quickly become my favorite in-ear to grab lately. The spaciousness is frankly one of the best I’ve heard. I can’t quite put my finger on exactly how Mike is doing this. Usually designers give a little dip in the midrange and/or elevate treble to give a sense of depth and forward projection. However there is nothing recessed or dipped about the midrange here, and treble is easy on the ears; yet somehow when I put the AR6 in after something else, I hear the midrange as obviously more forward, yet the presentation is slightly in front of me, instead of being right across my eyes or in my head. And while the AR6 doesn’t sound ‘grand’ in width, like say a Tralucent 1+2, it has much more realistic feeling to size proportions and space between the instruments. The depth and precision of the image is second to none. Staging is like being in the recording room with the band but with life-sized spaciousness. There’s almost a binaural dimensionality to it. Almost. It’s really quite unlike any in-ear experience I’ve had to date.
AR6 with Limited Edition AK100 MK2 and Chord Mojo
In terms of quantity, the PS6 has greater quantity but the greater quantity is not by a large margin. Mostly its an increase in mid bass for greater impact, although there is slightly more sub bass presence as well. The AR6 bass is very linear and even across the frequency response, whereas the PS6 has a rise in mid bass, small but tasteful. This gives the PS6 a slightly fuller and richer note over the AR6. With hip hop and rap, the increase in bass is appreciated. The AR6 bass, while not as impactful, has better texture and air for improved resolution and ambiance over the PS6. Both exhibit good balance between speed and decay.
Midrange
The midrange is where there is the biggest difference in presentation between the two. With the PS6, vocals sit squarely in the pocket, neither forward or recessed sounding with realistic weight and tone. In contrast the AR6 brings vocals more forward, particularly in the upper midrange. The result is that the AR6 is more resolving of low level vocal detail, like intakes of breath and throat inflections. However the fuller lower midrange and upper bass of the PS6 make for heftier male vocals with a more emotive connection. Where the PS6 may have the edge with male vocals, the AR6 is more evocative with female vocals.
The lighter note weight of the AR6 and the bump in the upper midrange brings a sense of greater clarity. Distortion guitars are airier and can really soar in the rise of tempo in a rock anthem, whereas the slightly thicker note of the PS6 is more grounded with greater dynamic impact for a richer, more musical approach.
Treble
Neither the AR6 or the PS6 are what I’d call bright or forward in treble, rather I’d label both as slightly laid back in treble. However where the AR6 is only a hair laid back in treble, the PS6 is more laid back and easy going in direct comparison. The PS6 is built for long session listening without fatigue. Even though it’s fairly laid back in treble, it still has good tonality and articulation. In contrast the AR6 has more overall treble presence and sparkle. It is also more resolving and articulate, as well as more extended. Treble details are more apparent and easier to pick out with the AR6.
Staging, Imaging & Separation
The AR6, with it’s design attention to ambiance and space, sounds larger and more realistic in staging properties. Instrument separation and placement is one of the most articulated in an in-ear and this is where it really separates itself from it’s PS6 peer. The AR6 is much less in-head and even though the midrange is more forward, it somehow projects itself out front more-so than the PS6. The PS6 by no means sounds small but it’s just not in the same league as the AR6 when it comes to these staging properties.
The UERM is the most neutral in-ear I’ve had the pleasure of listening to but if there is one thing I could change on it, it would be to make the bass presence under 50 hz more present and extended. This is one area the AR6 has the upper hand; it’s is very flat and even into the lowest reaches of its bass capability which is about 25 hz before it starts rolling off heavily. Due to these differences in bass tuning, the AR6 has more deep bass rumble and low bass texture but seems just a hair lacking in mid bass impact next to the UERM. While the UERM lacks the deepest extension and rumble/texture next to the AR6, it makes up for it with more realistic drum timbre and impact. Bass details seem just a bit more solid and delineated in the UERM under direct comparison.
Midrange
The UERM is known to be a hair laid back in the upper midrange, so the AR6 is a good contrast to the UERM with it’s bump in presence in that area of midrange. Similar to the PS6 comparison, the AR6 seems to be more evocative with female vocals and the UERMwith male vocals but the edge the AR6 held over the PS6 is greatly reduced here.
Both the AR6 and UERM can absolutely soar with distortion guitars and rock anthems but the approach is slightly different. The AR6 does it with its rise in the upper midrange and the UERM with it’s fuller middle mid and brighter lower treble. The end result is distortion guitars have more bite, edge and crunch with AR6 but sound fuller and airier with the UERM.
Treble
Where the AR6 achieves it’s clarity and any perceived brightness is in the upper midrange, the UERM achieves it through a brighter overall presentation throughout the treble. The UERM has more lower, middle and upper treble presence. It is a clean, bright and sparkly treble that never sounds piercing or harsh to my ears. I find the AR6 treble just as resolving but it doesn’t bring treble detail to your attention as much as the UERM does. This difference in treble presence is one of the characteristics that differentiates their staging properties as well.
Staging, Imaging & Separation
Both the AR6 and UERM are two of the largest sounding in-ears in my experience but the way it’s achieved is very different. Where the UERM sounds open ended, airy and very wide, more like an outdoor venue presentation, the AR6 sounds more like an in the studio presentation. While terms like in the studio and outdoor venue read like differences between small and large, that’s not the case here at all. The AR6 staging has very realistic proportions with life size spaciousness. At times the AR6 almost presents staging details as if you are listening to binaural recordings. Everything is so precisely placed, there is a great sense of three-dimensionality to the AR6 just not achieved in anything I’ve heard before. The UERM is it’s staging compliment with the more wide and open concert appeal. While I’ve always thought the UERM displays excellent depth, and it truly does, it’s not comparable to the lifelike spaciousness of the AR6.
While bass on Zeus does hits a bit harder and has more rumble as well, the most obvious difference is in the reverberation of the Zeus bass. Zeus bass lingers longer, sounding bolder and richer in tone. In direct comparison the AR6 bass is tighter and faster and as a consequence the AR6 sounds a good bit leaner overall compared to Zeus. The AR6 has excellent bass texture but bass texture and reverberation are a showcase piece to the Zeussignature.
Midrange
The midrange is really the star of the show on both models. Zeus has a fuller lower and middle midrange emphasis compared to the AR6, which seems more linear overall but has slight boost in the upper midrange. As a result, distortion guitars have a greater weight and heft in Zeus, again sounding thicker and richer. Next to the Zeus, the AR6 sounds leaner, airier and more nimble. Soaring guitars and dual leads truly soar with the AR6 but drop D tuning sounds heavier and sleazier with Zeus. On acoustic guitars, the AR6 brings out the sound of the pick hitting strings and the twang of the strings across the neck but Zeusbrings more focus to the vibration of the strings over the sound hole and resulting reverberations.
Vocals are also treated pretty differently on both as well. With Halestorm, Lzzy’s voice really grabs you by the throat with great clarity and superb energy on the AR6; every breathe, throat inflection is revealed but on Zeus she is darker, more brooding with the greater lower midrange emphasis. In contrast, Zeus really makes the emotional connection in male vocals. Radney Fosters ‘Godspeed’ is exquisitely intimate and fraught with the love of a parent for child separated by the distance of a touring musician.
Treble
I’ve mentioned treble being just a tiny bit laid back from neutral on the AR6 but Zeus treble is definitely more laid back than the AR6. The AR6 has a sense of brightness and clarity through the treble when directly comparing with Zeus. However Zeus treble is still just as articulate and resolving, it’s just pushed a little further back in the sonic image. Whereas the AR6 carries some airiness and daylight from the upper midrange through treble, Zeuswould never be described as airy.
Staging, Imaging & Separation
I’ve written with much emphasis on how special and unique the AR6 staging properties are with it’s life-like proportions and 3 dimensional presentation, however Zeus is also pretty special when it comes to its staging presentation as well. Zeus has incredible depth of presentation for an in-ear and is one of the deepest I’ve heard. Perhaps only the FitEarTG334 rivals this quality of depth. Zeus peals the layers back, exposing yet another layer of depth, after layer of depth. The precision of the layered presentation is Zeus most striking feature.
In direct comparison, the AR6 sounds distinctly wider and does a more precise image from left to right, which also leads to greater feeling of space and air between instruments. While both exhibit excellent height, the AR6 height is more proportional to its width and depth, whereas Zeus is definitely taller than it is wide. The AR6 depth is a realistic depth that is, again, proportional to its width and height. Zeus is more mind blowingly deep. It’s depth jumps off the sonic scape and instantly wows you. The AR6 staging prowess is more subtle in comparison and is less noticeable in noisy environs than quite environs, at least thats how my brain is interpreting what I hear.
For more product information visit Perfect Seal Laboratories at: website – facebook
Note: Review originally published on CYMBACAVUM.
Perfect Seal Lab
Before getting into the model being reviewed here, I wanted to share a Q&A I recently had with Mike, so he can shed a light on the Perfect Seal team and how he approaches the tunings that make up the Perfect Seal line-up:
Who are the team behind Perfect Seal Laboratories?
Mike: Currently we are a team of four. Myself, Dave, Brad and Brandi. Though I may use the term lightly, we all are musicians except Brandi. We have a really good thing going, every one is very reliable and that makes all the difference in the world.
How do you approach tuning a new design? Do you have target measurements or a specific sound signature in mind when you start designing an in-ear?
Mike: There are several ways and considerations into the approach of a new design. I like to start with a Diffuse Field curve then tweak things to my liking or toward whatever I feel the intended target may be wanting to hear.
Do you use specific songs or kinds of music to gauge the tuning direction when you are designing an in-ear? If so would you mind sharing a couple?
Mike: I do have specific songs I’ll use in the design and tuning of our units. I really don’t stick with one genre but will try several. A few bands I’ll use are Candlebox, Little Wayne, Charlie Daniels, Casey Donahew, and so on. There are certain artifacts that I’ll look for. I also like to use stuff I wrote and recorded because I obviously know the intended sound intimately.
What background do you bring to the industry that gives you a unique or different edge and/or sound?
Mike: Along with my music background, I bring my knowledge of various materials and modeling techniques. I have production methods that not too many are familiar with or even heard of. Some of which are in place and some just waiting to be incorporated.
Do you feel your line-up has a house sound or did you set out to have completely different sound in different models?
Mike: I hear a lot about “house sounds” but I don’t feel we have a house sound. I look to offer a wide range models that way anyone could fine something they prefer.
You offer some of your in-ears in silicone and acrylic. Are there any sound differences between the same model but built in each material? If so, to what would you attribute it?
Mike: There may be slight variations in sound between the same model being made in different materials. There could be a few reasons to explain this but my take is: 1. The material around the sound tube, insulating it. In a silicone unit, the entire run of the sound tube is in contact with the silicone. In an acrylic mold, the tube is usually in free air with canal portion of the tube encased in acrylic. 2. My second explanation is more of a theory that involves sound waves hitting the tip of the mold. A soft mold could possibly be dampening sound waves bouncing off of the eardrum while the hard mold may not be dampening them as much, causing piggyback signals or a slight difference in sound perception.
How would you describe your perfect sound signature?
Mike: My perfect sound signature is still evolving. The best way I could describe it is what some might describe as “V” shaped, but I wouldn’t call it that. I like sparkle in the highs (not fatiguing), clarity throughout the mid range and an elevated sub/low bass, not overly elevated, just enough to where it feels right in the mix. The AR6 has changed what I thought my ideal sound sig was, just wait until I merge the two
What are the biggest differences in your professional musician customers and audiophile customers?
Mike: There are musicians who just need a tool to hear a click or the band, so that’s pretty basic. Then you have musicians with more of an audiophile sense and they may want a higher fidelity sound. The biggest difference between the professional musicians and audiophiles that I noticed, believe it or not, has nothing to do with sound. It’s actually in how the CIEM looks. Audiophiles want wild colors, cool designs, and individuality built into their CIEM’s.
What is the most difficult part of your job/career?
Mike: That’s a tough one to answer, so maybe answering this question is, lol. Really though, it would be, being a salesman. I am not a salesman, I won’t try to convince anyone to buy our products, I simply answer any questions anyone would have about our products as honestly as I can, without adding all the extra polish to my words. I dislike being sold to, so I have no desire to push my products onto anyone else. I let people decide on their own, but I do understand in doing so, they sometimes get “sold” on another competitors products instead.
Who or what is your favorite band?
Mike: You saved the two hardest questions (for me) for last. I’m not sure that I have a favorite food, color, or band. I like so much that it’s really hard for me to choose. Lately I have been listening to a lot more alternative, Mumford and Sons, Muse, etc….
Fast forward to today, we have Mike crafting in-ears in both acrylic and silicone, with not only balanced armature designs with up to 8 drivers per side but also hybrid designs with both dynamic and balanced armature drivers. Perfect Seal also offers canal only shells, full custom shells and hard acrylic shells with soft canals. When it comes to options, no stone is left unturned.
Recently Mike has released a new series of custom in-ears: The Ambiance Series. The first release in this series is the new Perfect Seal Flagship, the AR6. The A and R stand for Ambiance Reference and the 6 is the balanced armature driver count. The AR6 was designed with soundstage and linear frequency response goals in mind, to wit, the marketing blurb on the website states, “experience superb clarity, awesome resolution and imaging”. The AR6 is offered in acrylic and silicone but Perfect Seal will need to see your impressions first before giving the thumbs up for a silicone build, as the canal pieces in silicone will need to be a little larger than in acrylic. This is due to the 4 sound bore design and the need for more space in silicone with that many bores. Pricing starts at $950 for acrylic and goes up from there.
Manufacturer Specs:
$950 Acrylic
- Six Balanced Armature Drivers
- 1 Low Driver
- 2 Low/Mid
- 2 Mid
- 1 Tweeter
- 5 way passive crossover
- 4 sound bores
- Standard 2 pin connector
I chose silicone for my set, as I’ve previously only had one other experience with silicone in-ears. Mike offers many possibilities when it comes to colors, designs and finishes; many of which aren’t really shown on the website, so it’s a good idea to contact Perfect Seal when ordering and discuss your aesthetic aspirations. I decided to go with a swirl of his ‘blue purple’ color along with the ‘green purple’ color. The dedicated AR6 thread on Head-Fi has some pictures of a beautiful orange acrylic set that is a must see!
Perfect Seal customs come with a customized S3 case, which is similar to an Otterbox. The customized foam insert has a slot for the cleaning tool, an open area to lay our wound cable and possibly a silica drying pod, as well as two small areas for each ear piece. The stock cable looks to be standard issue PlasticsOne Motion series cables, which comes with a 3.5mm right angle plug that is smart phone case friendly, SPC tinsel wire, rugged Y-split, neck slider and memory wire at the overmolded 2-pin connectors.
SOUND
I’d say the AR6 is a very slightly mid-centric take on reference tuning. There is a little boost in the upper mid, making it really clear sounding but not necessarily forward sounding. Bass linearity is excellent and extends into the deepest depths. Lower treble is slightly laid back from reference tuning, but picks back up in middle treble providing a nice presence and shimmer, while staying easy to listen to.The AR6 has quickly become my favorite in-ear to grab lately. The spaciousness is frankly one of the best I’ve heard. I can’t quite put my finger on exactly how Mike is doing this. Usually designers give a little dip in the midrange and/or elevate treble to give a sense of depth and forward projection. However there is nothing recessed or dipped about the midrange here, and treble is easy on the ears; yet somehow when I put the AR6 in after something else, I hear the midrange as obviously more forward, yet the presentation is slightly in front of me, instead of being right across my eyes or in my head. And while the AR6 doesn’t sound ‘grand’ in width, like say a Tralucent 1+2, it has much more realistic feeling to size proportions and space between the instruments. The depth and precision of the image is second to none. Staging is like being in the recording room with the band but with life-sized spaciousness. There’s almost a binaural dimensionality to it. Almost. It’s really quite unlike any in-ear experience I’ve had to date.
SELECT COMPARISONS
AR6 VS PERFECT SEAL PS6 ($650)
BassIn terms of quantity, the PS6 has greater quantity but the greater quantity is not by a large margin. Mostly its an increase in mid bass for greater impact, although there is slightly more sub bass presence as well. The AR6 bass is very linear and even across the frequency response, whereas the PS6 has a rise in mid bass, small but tasteful. This gives the PS6 a slightly fuller and richer note over the AR6. With hip hop and rap, the increase in bass is appreciated. The AR6 bass, while not as impactful, has better texture and air for improved resolution and ambiance over the PS6. Both exhibit good balance between speed and decay.
Midrange
The midrange is where there is the biggest difference in presentation between the two. With the PS6, vocals sit squarely in the pocket, neither forward or recessed sounding with realistic weight and tone. In contrast the AR6 brings vocals more forward, particularly in the upper midrange. The result is that the AR6 is more resolving of low level vocal detail, like intakes of breath and throat inflections. However the fuller lower midrange and upper bass of the PS6 make for heftier male vocals with a more emotive connection. Where the PS6 may have the edge with male vocals, the AR6 is more evocative with female vocals.
The lighter note weight of the AR6 and the bump in the upper midrange brings a sense of greater clarity. Distortion guitars are airier and can really soar in the rise of tempo in a rock anthem, whereas the slightly thicker note of the PS6 is more grounded with greater dynamic impact for a richer, more musical approach.
Treble
Neither the AR6 or the PS6 are what I’d call bright or forward in treble, rather I’d label both as slightly laid back in treble. However where the AR6 is only a hair laid back in treble, the PS6 is more laid back and easy going in direct comparison. The PS6 is built for long session listening without fatigue. Even though it’s fairly laid back in treble, it still has good tonality and articulation. In contrast the AR6 has more overall treble presence and sparkle. It is also more resolving and articulate, as well as more extended. Treble details are more apparent and easier to pick out with the AR6.
Staging, Imaging & Separation
The AR6, with it’s design attention to ambiance and space, sounds larger and more realistic in staging properties. Instrument separation and placement is one of the most articulated in an in-ear and this is where it really separates itself from it’s PS6 peer. The AR6 is much less in-head and even though the midrange is more forward, it somehow projects itself out front more-so than the PS6. The PS6 by no means sounds small but it’s just not in the same league as the AR6 when it comes to these staging properties.
AR6 VS ULTIMATE EARS REFERENCE MONITOR (DISCONTINUED; REPLACED BY UERR $999)
BassThe UERM is the most neutral in-ear I’ve had the pleasure of listening to but if there is one thing I could change on it, it would be to make the bass presence under 50 hz more present and extended. This is one area the AR6 has the upper hand; it’s is very flat and even into the lowest reaches of its bass capability which is about 25 hz before it starts rolling off heavily. Due to these differences in bass tuning, the AR6 has more deep bass rumble and low bass texture but seems just a hair lacking in mid bass impact next to the UERM. While the UERM lacks the deepest extension and rumble/texture next to the AR6, it makes up for it with more realistic drum timbre and impact. Bass details seem just a bit more solid and delineated in the UERM under direct comparison.
Midrange
The UERM is known to be a hair laid back in the upper midrange, so the AR6 is a good contrast to the UERM with it’s bump in presence in that area of midrange. Similar to the PS6 comparison, the AR6 seems to be more evocative with female vocals and the UERMwith male vocals but the edge the AR6 held over the PS6 is greatly reduced here.
Both the AR6 and UERM can absolutely soar with distortion guitars and rock anthems but the approach is slightly different. The AR6 does it with its rise in the upper midrange and the UERM with it’s fuller middle mid and brighter lower treble. The end result is distortion guitars have more bite, edge and crunch with AR6 but sound fuller and airier with the UERM.
Treble
Where the AR6 achieves it’s clarity and any perceived brightness is in the upper midrange, the UERM achieves it through a brighter overall presentation throughout the treble. The UERM has more lower, middle and upper treble presence. It is a clean, bright and sparkly treble that never sounds piercing or harsh to my ears. I find the AR6 treble just as resolving but it doesn’t bring treble detail to your attention as much as the UERM does. This difference in treble presence is one of the characteristics that differentiates their staging properties as well.
Staging, Imaging & Separation
Both the AR6 and UERM are two of the largest sounding in-ears in my experience but the way it’s achieved is very different. Where the UERM sounds open ended, airy and very wide, more like an outdoor venue presentation, the AR6 sounds more like an in the studio presentation. While terms like in the studio and outdoor venue read like differences between small and large, that’s not the case here at all. The AR6 staging has very realistic proportions with life size spaciousness. At times the AR6 almost presents staging details as if you are listening to binaural recordings. Everything is so precisely placed, there is a great sense of three-dimensionality to the AR6 just not achieved in anything I’ve heard before. The UERM is it’s staging compliment with the more wide and open concert appeal. While I’ve always thought the UERM displays excellent depth, and it truly does, it’s not comparable to the lifelike spaciousness of the AR6.
AR6 VS EMPIRE EARS ZEUS ($2099)
BassWhile bass on Zeus does hits a bit harder and has more rumble as well, the most obvious difference is in the reverberation of the Zeus bass. Zeus bass lingers longer, sounding bolder and richer in tone. In direct comparison the AR6 bass is tighter and faster and as a consequence the AR6 sounds a good bit leaner overall compared to Zeus. The AR6 has excellent bass texture but bass texture and reverberation are a showcase piece to the Zeussignature.
Midrange
The midrange is really the star of the show on both models. Zeus has a fuller lower and middle midrange emphasis compared to the AR6, which seems more linear overall but has slight boost in the upper midrange. As a result, distortion guitars have a greater weight and heft in Zeus, again sounding thicker and richer. Next to the Zeus, the AR6 sounds leaner, airier and more nimble. Soaring guitars and dual leads truly soar with the AR6 but drop D tuning sounds heavier and sleazier with Zeus. On acoustic guitars, the AR6 brings out the sound of the pick hitting strings and the twang of the strings across the neck but Zeusbrings more focus to the vibration of the strings over the sound hole and resulting reverberations.
Vocals are also treated pretty differently on both as well. With Halestorm, Lzzy’s voice really grabs you by the throat with great clarity and superb energy on the AR6; every breathe, throat inflection is revealed but on Zeus she is darker, more brooding with the greater lower midrange emphasis. In contrast, Zeus really makes the emotional connection in male vocals. Radney Fosters ‘Godspeed’ is exquisitely intimate and fraught with the love of a parent for child separated by the distance of a touring musician.
Treble
I’ve mentioned treble being just a tiny bit laid back from neutral on the AR6 but Zeus treble is definitely more laid back than the AR6. The AR6 has a sense of brightness and clarity through the treble when directly comparing with Zeus. However Zeus treble is still just as articulate and resolving, it’s just pushed a little further back in the sonic image. Whereas the AR6 carries some airiness and daylight from the upper midrange through treble, Zeuswould never be described as airy.
Staging, Imaging & Separation
I’ve written with much emphasis on how special and unique the AR6 staging properties are with it’s life-like proportions and 3 dimensional presentation, however Zeus is also pretty special when it comes to its staging presentation as well. Zeus has incredible depth of presentation for an in-ear and is one of the deepest I’ve heard. Perhaps only the FitEarTG334 rivals this quality of depth. Zeus peals the layers back, exposing yet another layer of depth, after layer of depth. The precision of the layered presentation is Zeus most striking feature.
In direct comparison, the AR6 sounds distinctly wider and does a more precise image from left to right, which also leads to greater feeling of space and air between instruments. While both exhibit excellent height, the AR6 height is more proportional to its width and depth, whereas Zeus is definitely taller than it is wide. The AR6 depth is a realistic depth that is, again, proportional to its width and height. Zeus is more mind blowingly deep. It’s depth jumps off the sonic scape and instantly wows you. The AR6 staging prowess is more subtle in comparison and is less noticeable in noisy environs than quite environs, at least thats how my brain is interpreting what I hear.
CONCLUSION
The AR6 rivals anything top of the line being put out by anyone. Period. I’m seriously in awe of its presentation and I haven’t been this excited about an in-ear since I first received the UERM. At a starting price of $950, the AR6 is a veritable steal in the growing landscape of flagship custom in-ears, not to mention Mike’s attention to customer service is one of the best around.For more product information visit Perfect Seal Laboratories at: website – facebook
Note: Review originally published on CYMBACAVUM.
Disclaimer: The Echobox Finder X1 was provided to me as a review sample.
The X1 contains a 9.2mm dynamic driver and is very well made. It has small and unobtrusive housings made from titanium. The housing shape is reminiscent of the Final Audio Piano Forte series but unlike those, the X1 is designed to fully seal the ear and can almost disappear from view depending on your ear canal shape. The small, titanium bell shape is quite attractive and comfortable.
The X1 cable is silver plated copper wire and by all appearances seems pretty durable. Thankfully it is also very flexible. What good is bragging about your wire composition if the thing is an annoyance to use? The only real concern I have is the lack of external strain reliefs at the housings. Supposedly strain reliefs are contained internally. The cable is terminated in a small, straight TRS plug with silver accents to match the titanium of the housings. This plug works great with iPhone cases. The X1 cable is pleasure to use and hopefully it proves as durable over the long haul as it appears.
Accessories include a carrying case and several different kinds of tips to fit most ears. The stock single flange tips are very soft and comfortable. It’s a shame I couldn’t maintain a seal in my left ear with them, they really are very comfortable. Maybe for the future they can slightly stiffen or thicken them just a hair, so they don't fold in on itself quite as easily. That would help seal and not give up much in comfort. Also included are a pair of triple flange, double flange and Comply tips. I found my best fitting with Spin Fit tips, which allowed me to fit the X1 a bit deeper and tame some of the energetic treble.
This leads me to the tunable filters the X1 comes with:
Red - Treble
White - Reference
Black - Bass
Removing the filters from the box turned out to be quite a challenge. I nearly went WWE on it. Suffice to say I won't be taking any glamour shots of the inside of the box now! Once removed from the packaging, an omission from the manufacturer is quickly brought to light: now what do I do with these tiny filters? There’s no place to store them or organize them to keep from losing them. RHA and AKG both provide a metal plate to screw them to for long term storage when not in use. I guess I’ll keep my X1 filters in a little ziplock in the carrying case.
The white reference filters turned out to be my favorite of the three. With those in place, the overall sound signature is V shaped with boosted deep bass and bright, sparkling highs. Bass is definitely enhanced and is focused on deep/sub bass. It has a natural, if slightly extended, decay. The treble is pretty bright; it’s energetic, highly sparkling and can at times be a little splashy. Deeper fit of the Spin Fit tips comes in handy here to mitigate the peaks. The midrange, while recessed compared to bass and treble, is very clear and very airy. There is zero midrange mud, which is a pleasant surprise because many bass enhanced phones get a little muddy here.
The red filters, having the least acoustic resistance, are the brightest by far. Ultimately the red filter is a little too top heavy for my tastes but I definitely preferred the lighter bass of the red filters. It felt faster, more nimble and a bit airier or less dense. The black filters, on the other hand, are are denser sounding, warmer and bassier in comparison. While the black filters tame the treble a bit more than the white filters, I felt it was missing some of the midrange and treble airiness I appreciated in the white and red filters. The good news is that neither of the filter selections deviate too far from overall quality from each other. In other words, the sound signature maintains good quality with whichever filter you use.
The X1 seems made for filter modding. Underneath the screw on filters, there is a nice little chamber to experiment with different filtering materials. I decided to use the red stock filters to test with, as it has the least bass and adding material is going give the perception of more bass. Cutting the tips off of a Q-tip is my favorite and most successful material I’ve used in other filter mods and it proved to be successful here too. The Q-tip cotton tames the treble nicely without robbing too much air and energy from the midrange but also doesn’t sound quite as bassy as the black filters. It seems the tune-ability options for the X1 are going to be quite expansive!
MSRP for the X1 is slated to be $199 but can be had for as little as $79 on the Echobox Indiegogo campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/echobox-the-evolution-of-personal-audio#/
The X1 contains a 9.2mm dynamic driver and is very well made. It has small and unobtrusive housings made from titanium. The housing shape is reminiscent of the Final Audio Piano Forte series but unlike those, the X1 is designed to fully seal the ear and can almost disappear from view depending on your ear canal shape. The small, titanium bell shape is quite attractive and comfortable.
The X1 cable is silver plated copper wire and by all appearances seems pretty durable. Thankfully it is also very flexible. What good is bragging about your wire composition if the thing is an annoyance to use? The only real concern I have is the lack of external strain reliefs at the housings. Supposedly strain reliefs are contained internally. The cable is terminated in a small, straight TRS plug with silver accents to match the titanium of the housings. This plug works great with iPhone cases. The X1 cable is pleasure to use and hopefully it proves as durable over the long haul as it appears.
Accessories include a carrying case and several different kinds of tips to fit most ears. The stock single flange tips are very soft and comfortable. It’s a shame I couldn’t maintain a seal in my left ear with them, they really are very comfortable. Maybe for the future they can slightly stiffen or thicken them just a hair, so they don't fold in on itself quite as easily. That would help seal and not give up much in comfort. Also included are a pair of triple flange, double flange and Comply tips. I found my best fitting with Spin Fit tips, which allowed me to fit the X1 a bit deeper and tame some of the energetic treble.
This leads me to the tunable filters the X1 comes with:
Red - Treble
White - Reference
Black - Bass
Removing the filters from the box turned out to be quite a challenge. I nearly went WWE on it. Suffice to say I won't be taking any glamour shots of the inside of the box now! Once removed from the packaging, an omission from the manufacturer is quickly brought to light: now what do I do with these tiny filters? There’s no place to store them or organize them to keep from losing them. RHA and AKG both provide a metal plate to screw them to for long term storage when not in use. I guess I’ll keep my X1 filters in a little ziplock in the carrying case.
The white reference filters turned out to be my favorite of the three. With those in place, the overall sound signature is V shaped with boosted deep bass and bright, sparkling highs. Bass is definitely enhanced and is focused on deep/sub bass. It has a natural, if slightly extended, decay. The treble is pretty bright; it’s energetic, highly sparkling and can at times be a little splashy. Deeper fit of the Spin Fit tips comes in handy here to mitigate the peaks. The midrange, while recessed compared to bass and treble, is very clear and very airy. There is zero midrange mud, which is a pleasant surprise because many bass enhanced phones get a little muddy here.
The red filters, having the least acoustic resistance, are the brightest by far. Ultimately the red filter is a little too top heavy for my tastes but I definitely preferred the lighter bass of the red filters. It felt faster, more nimble and a bit airier or less dense. The black filters, on the other hand, are are denser sounding, warmer and bassier in comparison. While the black filters tame the treble a bit more than the white filters, I felt it was missing some of the midrange and treble airiness I appreciated in the white and red filters. The good news is that neither of the filter selections deviate too far from overall quality from each other. In other words, the sound signature maintains good quality with whichever filter you use.
The X1 seems made for filter modding. Underneath the screw on filters, there is a nice little chamber to experiment with different filtering materials. I decided to use the red stock filters to test with, as it has the least bass and adding material is going give the perception of more bass. Cutting the tips off of a Q-tip is my favorite and most successful material I’ve used in other filter mods and it proved to be successful here too. The Q-tip cotton tames the treble nicely without robbing too much air and energy from the midrange but also doesn’t sound quite as bassy as the black filters. It seems the tune-ability options for the X1 are going to be quite expansive!
MSRP for the X1 is slated to be $199 but can be had for as little as $79 on the Echobox Indiegogo campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/echobox-the-evolution-of-personal-audio#/
shotgunshane
@maguire, I'll get you a pic of the mod up in a couple of days.
maguire
Oh.... mighty fine of you as usual....
shotgunshane
Finally remembered to add the requested mod photos. Please excuse the poor quality!
Kyyul
After a long and exhausting process I've gone from HE560's to HD650's constantly trying to find something that is worth spending my money on. And I think I've arrived at the HE400S. I just want something light and comfortable that won't wear me out. Even though I like more bass heavy electronic music, at this point I'm convinced that anything will be an upgrade over my AKG553.
shotgunshane
I'm not familiar with the AKG553. I also didn't try the HE400S with bass heavy electronic music but did with a lot of different rock music, along with some acoustic, country and bit of classical. It did great with all of those. The 400S is definitely light and comfortable to me.
Schmavies
This is one of the cheapest planar magnet headphone on the market, but I can't afford it. D:
Brainwavz Jive - A Modification Away From Excellence
Disclaimer: Brainwavz provided the unit used for this review.
Brainwavz sure are one busy company. It seems that every few months they are releasing new or updated products. The Jive is one of the newest releases. The Jive is a budget dynamic driver in-ear market with an MSRP of just $28. Originally marketed as having balanced armature sound in a dynamic driver, current marketing expresses the Jive as having incredible liveliness and wide soundstage to bring right into the music. I think I can agree with the later expressions, the Jive is one lively ride!
Specifications:
• Drivers : Dynamic, 9 mm
• Rated Impedance : 16 Ohms
• Frequency Range : 20 Hz ~ 20 kHz
• Sensitivity : 98 dB @ 1 mW
• Rated Input Power : 20 mW
• Plug : 3.5 mm, Gold-Plated
• Cable : 1.3 m, Copper
• iOS & Android Versions
Build and Aesthetics
The Jive comes in 3 different colors: Ink Blue, Army Green and Blood Red. The ink blue color provided for this review permeates throughout the design. Tips, housing, cable, inline remote and terminating plug are all in the quite attractive ink blue. Build seems on par for Brainwavz regardless of price bracket - very robust and durable. The sealed, colored metal housings really look rather nice. They are fairly tiny with easily visible left and right markings. The cable is plenty flexible and slightly thick; the y-split practical and slightly oversized with a nice functional neck slider; the plug seems durable with oversized strain relief; the housing strain reliefs again slightly oversized compared to typical offerings in this price bracket. The Jive was built to withstand a rough and care-free lifestyle.
The inline remote comes in two options: Apple or Android compatible. The unit reviewed here has the Apple compatible verison. The inline remote is small and thin, so it easily disappears when out and about. Buttons are small but we'll spaced and layout is the common Apple remote layout: volume up, answer/end call, volume down. The center button also acts as the pause (single press), track skip forward (double press) and track skip back/replay (triple press).
Accessories
The Jive comes with a shirt clip and 3 sets of silicone tips (S, M and L) in the same color as the ink blue housings. Not only do they look good, they are comfortable too. They are wide bore tips, so I would like to see Brainwavz consider additionally providing narrow bore tips to help with treble compensation. Also included was 1 set of Comply S400 sport foams. I don't really recommend those with the Jive signature. That porous foam tends to lean the signature out for a brighter, more treble focused perception. I feel that the normal Comply foam models work better with the Jive signature.
Brainwavz also includes their revamped carrying case. Made of the same great sturdy and durable material of previous cases, this design features a longer, more rectangular shape instead of the old squarish boxy shape. I think the new design is a bit more practical for my uses, but don't worry, the old case is still available as a purchasable accessory.
Sound
Initial sonic impression is of a V shaped signature, showcasing a deep and rumbling bass and accentuated, attention grabbing treble. The marketing is spot on, the Jive is very lively and dynamic with a nice and wide presentation.
Treble - Treble is front and center. It's is sparkly, upfront and resonant. It also has a slight tendency to accentuate sibilance at times. The loose resonant quality of the treble tells me the all metal housings could use some damping material inside. I think if resonances could be damped, the treble quality could improve, leading to a more articulate and fun treble presence. As it stands now, the treble resonances are distracting and downright annoying at times, especially at louder volumes. Otherwise it has a nice brassy tonality and excellent timbre. There is a lot to like here, even with the issues mentioned; there is certainly modding potential (more on this later).
Midrange - Vocals are pretty clear with a nice warmth to them. Distortion guitars have good bite and crunch. While no means a resolution master, details levels are very satisfactory, especially at the price bracket. Midrange tonality is natural and pleasing; so while it sits a little recessed in comparison to the treble and bass, the quality of the midrange is rather good.
Bass - While Brainwavz had marketed the Jive as a balanced armature sounding dynamic driver, there is no mistaking the bass; it's clearly a dynamic driver type of bass. Bass is prominent in the mix and while not basshead levels, it is definitely a driving force of the signature. While just slightly on the boomy side, decay is natural sounding with pleasing deep bass rumble and good texture.
Modifications
As mentioned earlier, the treble can be a bit too lively with the housing resonances, that can cause the treble to ring and bass to sound a little boomy, but I can clearly hear the potential this driver has to offer. Inspired by my friend and fellow Head-Fier, James444, I decided to mod the Jive in order to improve upon the quality of the Jive signature.
The nozzle is covered with a typical acoustically clear filter sticker. Its main purpose is to keep dirt and moisture out of the housing. Using a pin/needle, I gently pried the sticker from the nozzle. This revealed what I had assumed - there is no damping material in the housing and you can see clear to the driver.
I decided use cotton as damping material, cutting the end from a Q-tip. On my first attempt, I used all of the cotton from the entire tip in one housing. I then flipped the Q-tip and did the same for the other housing. I carefully re-applied the same filter stickers and gave it a try. The resulting sound was a very bass heavy Jive with greatly reduced treble sparkle and presence. In fact, the treble was reduced much too much and the sound was no longer lively and robbed it of all the good things I had heard un-modded. While over damped, the treble ringing and resonances were completely gone. Obviously I’d used too much cotton.
I used my needle to remove the filter stickers again and removed all the cotton. This time I tried to cut the cotton pieces in half and used the less full half to reinsert into the nozzle (the cotton of a Q-tip is denser on one end than the other). Once completed for both sides, I reapplied the filter stickers and eagerly turned the music back on.
Success! The newly modified sound coming from the Jive maintains everything I liked about the stock version but removed the treble ringing and resonances and also removed the stock bass boominess as well. The end result was slightly perceived more bass quantity but a tighter more textured bass in return. The treble retained it’s excellent liveliness and tonality but completely removed all the annoyances I had early. Unexpectedly the midrange became richer and more forward in the mix. The Jive has changed from just an average budget in-ear with potential, to a very pleasing and engaging in-ear that clearly punches way above it’s price point.
Summary
The Jive can now be found directly from Brainwavz, in their new web store at brainwavzaudio.com. Brainwavz in-ears often go on sale but even at MSRP, it’s a veritable steal for someone willing to perform a very simple modification that turns a decent budget offering into a rather excellent sub $100 performer.
Disclaimer: Brainwavz provided the unit used for this review.
Brainwavz sure are one busy company. It seems that every few months they are releasing new or updated products. The Jive is one of the newest releases. The Jive is a budget dynamic driver in-ear market with an MSRP of just $28. Originally marketed as having balanced armature sound in a dynamic driver, current marketing expresses the Jive as having incredible liveliness and wide soundstage to bring right into the music. I think I can agree with the later expressions, the Jive is one lively ride!
Specifications:
• Drivers : Dynamic, 9 mm
• Rated Impedance : 16 Ohms
• Frequency Range : 20 Hz ~ 20 kHz
• Sensitivity : 98 dB @ 1 mW
• Rated Input Power : 20 mW
• Plug : 3.5 mm, Gold-Plated
• Cable : 1.3 m, Copper
• iOS & Android Versions
Build and Aesthetics
The Jive comes in 3 different colors: Ink Blue, Army Green and Blood Red. The ink blue color provided for this review permeates throughout the design. Tips, housing, cable, inline remote and terminating plug are all in the quite attractive ink blue. Build seems on par for Brainwavz regardless of price bracket - very robust and durable. The sealed, colored metal housings really look rather nice. They are fairly tiny with easily visible left and right markings. The cable is plenty flexible and slightly thick; the y-split practical and slightly oversized with a nice functional neck slider; the plug seems durable with oversized strain relief; the housing strain reliefs again slightly oversized compared to typical offerings in this price bracket. The Jive was built to withstand a rough and care-free lifestyle.
The inline remote comes in two options: Apple or Android compatible. The unit reviewed here has the Apple compatible verison. The inline remote is small and thin, so it easily disappears when out and about. Buttons are small but we'll spaced and layout is the common Apple remote layout: volume up, answer/end call, volume down. The center button also acts as the pause (single press), track skip forward (double press) and track skip back/replay (triple press).
Accessories
The Jive comes with a shirt clip and 3 sets of silicone tips (S, M and L) in the same color as the ink blue housings. Not only do they look good, they are comfortable too. They are wide bore tips, so I would like to see Brainwavz consider additionally providing narrow bore tips to help with treble compensation. Also included was 1 set of Comply S400 sport foams. I don't really recommend those with the Jive signature. That porous foam tends to lean the signature out for a brighter, more treble focused perception. I feel that the normal Comply foam models work better with the Jive signature.
Brainwavz also includes their revamped carrying case. Made of the same great sturdy and durable material of previous cases, this design features a longer, more rectangular shape instead of the old squarish boxy shape. I think the new design is a bit more practical for my uses, but don't worry, the old case is still available as a purchasable accessory.
Sound
Initial sonic impression is of a V shaped signature, showcasing a deep and rumbling bass and accentuated, attention grabbing treble. The marketing is spot on, the Jive is very lively and dynamic with a nice and wide presentation.
Treble - Treble is front and center. It's is sparkly, upfront and resonant. It also has a slight tendency to accentuate sibilance at times. The loose resonant quality of the treble tells me the all metal housings could use some damping material inside. I think if resonances could be damped, the treble quality could improve, leading to a more articulate and fun treble presence. As it stands now, the treble resonances are distracting and downright annoying at times, especially at louder volumes. Otherwise it has a nice brassy tonality and excellent timbre. There is a lot to like here, even with the issues mentioned; there is certainly modding potential (more on this later).
Midrange - Vocals are pretty clear with a nice warmth to them. Distortion guitars have good bite and crunch. While no means a resolution master, details levels are very satisfactory, especially at the price bracket. Midrange tonality is natural and pleasing; so while it sits a little recessed in comparison to the treble and bass, the quality of the midrange is rather good.
Bass - While Brainwavz had marketed the Jive as a balanced armature sounding dynamic driver, there is no mistaking the bass; it's clearly a dynamic driver type of bass. Bass is prominent in the mix and while not basshead levels, it is definitely a driving force of the signature. While just slightly on the boomy side, decay is natural sounding with pleasing deep bass rumble and good texture.
Modifications
As mentioned earlier, the treble can be a bit too lively with the housing resonances, that can cause the treble to ring and bass to sound a little boomy, but I can clearly hear the potential this driver has to offer. Inspired by my friend and fellow Head-Fier, James444, I decided to mod the Jive in order to improve upon the quality of the Jive signature.
The nozzle is covered with a typical acoustically clear filter sticker. Its main purpose is to keep dirt and moisture out of the housing. Using a pin/needle, I gently pried the sticker from the nozzle. This revealed what I had assumed - there is no damping material in the housing and you can see clear to the driver.
I decided use cotton as damping material, cutting the end from a Q-tip. On my first attempt, I used all of the cotton from the entire tip in one housing. I then flipped the Q-tip and did the same for the other housing. I carefully re-applied the same filter stickers and gave it a try. The resulting sound was a very bass heavy Jive with greatly reduced treble sparkle and presence. In fact, the treble was reduced much too much and the sound was no longer lively and robbed it of all the good things I had heard un-modded. While over damped, the treble ringing and resonances were completely gone. Obviously I’d used too much cotton.
I used my needle to remove the filter stickers again and removed all the cotton. This time I tried to cut the cotton pieces in half and used the less full half to reinsert into the nozzle (the cotton of a Q-tip is denser on one end than the other). Once completed for both sides, I reapplied the filter stickers and eagerly turned the music back on.
Success! The newly modified sound coming from the Jive maintains everything I liked about the stock version but removed the treble ringing and resonances and also removed the stock bass boominess as well. The end result was slightly perceived more bass quantity but a tighter more textured bass in return. The treble retained it’s excellent liveliness and tonality but completely removed all the annoyances I had early. Unexpectedly the midrange became richer and more forward in the mix. The Jive has changed from just an average budget in-ear with potential, to a very pleasing and engaging in-ear that clearly punches way above it’s price point.
Summary
The Jive can now be found directly from Brainwavz, in their new web store at brainwavzaudio.com. Brainwavz in-ears often go on sale but even at MSRP, it’s a veritable steal for someone willing to perform a very simple modification that turns a decent budget offering into a rather excellent sub $100 performer.
dhruvmeena96
I did your mod.. Just even less cotton and more spread in nozzle.
Man the whole mids changed. Depth increased by leaps and bound.. Phantom stage.
Better than many iem under 100$.
Just a little strong bass for my taste.
Man the whole mids changed. Depth increased by leaps and bound.. Phantom stage.
Better than many iem under 100$.
Just a little strong bass for my taste.
Axgio Sprint Bluetooth Headset
Disclaimer: The Axgio Sprint headset reviewed here was supplied free of charge
I’ve never heard of Axgio, much less their Sprint Bluetooth headset. A quick Google search turns up a company that specializes in smartphones and smartphone accessories. Apparently Axgio not only makes smartphone hardware but has designed their own Android based OS named Neonado.
The Sprint is an in-ear monitor headset that boasts an IPX4 rating for water resistance, thus it’s marketed as sports headset that is ultimately sweat-proof and durable enough to withstand tough workouts and more. Other manufacturer specifications are as follows:
Chip: CSR8645 (with AptX)
Bluetooth Version: 4.1
Profile Supported: HSP, HFP, A2DP and AVRCP
Battery Capacity: 130mAh
Charging time: about 2 hr
Charging port: USB cable
Music time: 8hr
Talk time: 8hr
Driver Unit: 7mm (SPK)
Fit and Aesthetics
The 7mm dynamic drivers are protected in a black and nickel colored, sealed plastic pill shaped housing. Being that they are sealed housings, I do get a bit of occasional driver flex but nothing concerning. The housings are designed to be ergonomic and comfortably sit in the concha of the ear. While indeed very comfortable, I do have issue attaining proper seal with the nozzle angling away from the housing. I’ve experienced this same nozzle angle on some universal IEM’s in the past and also found fit to be hit or miss. Due to this nozzle angle, it makes deeper, more secure fit, pretty much impossible for me, as well as impacting the type of tip I could use and still maintain proper seal. This may not be an issue for many or even most users, as I have pretty straight and wide canals. Users with smaller canals and/or greatly curved canals will appreciate the ease of shallow fit.
Rather than the typical strain relief existing the housings, the cable has about 3.5 inches of built in memory wire. Since the Sprint is designed to be worn over-the-ear, the memory wire is well thought out to hold the short cable between the two housings in place. The rest of the cable is slightly rubbery to the touch and very pliable. Located approximately 6 inches from the right housing are the inline controls. Placement is very good- far enough away, so as not to be too close to the ear but also not so far it starts to go behind your neck, should you wear the Sprint that way. The cable also has a little clip built in for storage purposes.
Accessories
Rounding out the accessories are a USB charging cable, 4 pair of silicone tips (XS, S, M and L) and 3 pair of foam tips (S, M, and L). The foam tips are not your typical Comply tips. These have a thicker, slicker coating over the foam that helps it rebound its shape much quicker. These foam tips are the only tips that would give me a somewhat easy to maintain fit with the angled nozzle. Other tips I tried just take too much fiddling to try and obtain a consistent and proper seal. Surprisingly there is no carrying case included. This is really a pretty important oversight, as I tend to carry the headset and the charging cable with me.
Bluetooth and Controls
Inline controls are pretty straight forward, if a bit odd in button placement. Being so used to most Apple controls having the volume buttons at the top and bottom with the on/off in the center, I often found myself forgetting and accidentally pressing the wrong button. I can’t tell you how many times I started to redial last number. However, once you get used to these differences, operation is actually very simple.
The bottom on/off button also controls pairing (long hold past powering on), as well as the standard answer/end call and last number redial via a double press. Volume buttons also act as next song/previous song buttons with double presses.
Bluetooth connectivity worked flawlessly for me. Unlike the Brainwavz BLU100, I never had any drop-outs, static or other noise interference and the unit didn’t mind if I had other devices in my Bluetooth list. While I didn’t test the limits of the Bluetooth distance, I never had any issues laying my iPhone down and walking across the room to pick something up. Battery life is claimed to be 8 hours and I’d estimate it to be pretty accurate. I tend to listen a few hours a day and wouldn’t need to charge for several days at a time.
Sound Quality
Upon first using the Sprint headset, my first initial take away was surprise; this isn’t your typical consumer tuning. It’s actually quite balanced and, dare I say, fairly neutral. On top of that, the clarity throughout, but especially in the midrange, is quite impressive.
Bass
These are not your typical bloated, boom, boom dynamic drivers. Bass is light and nimble, although it does roll off in deep and sub bass pretty quickly. Bass is fairly balanced with the midrange and treble while indoors where ambient noise is considerably quieter. I’d prefer a bit more quantity in deep bass and sub bass, especially when commuting, traveling or doing anything in an outdoor area, as those are first frequencies to be lost in noisy environments. Otherwise bass speed and tautness is rather good. No bloat or masking to affect other frequencies. Bassheads will not be satisfied by any stretch.
Midrange and Treble
The Sprint’s specialty is vocals- acoustic and singer/songwriter music really shines. The midrange is exceptionally clear and open sounding. I find it neither forward, nor recessed but very well balanced with treble levels, for a nice and even sound from lower midrange on up through the upper most treble extension. Treble is articulate and smooth with plenty of sparkle and air. At times there can be just the smallest edge of brightness, mainly as a psychoacoustic effect of being fairly bass-light, especially in commute environs.
Comparisons – BrainWavz BLU100
If the Sprint is balanced and fairly neutral, then the BLU100 sounds overtly V shaped in direct comparison. However the BLU100’s fuller and richer bass is welcomed when listening outdoors or on the daily commute. Where the Sprint pull ahead is with its crystal clear midrange and much smoother, more articulate treble. The BLU100 vocals sound pretty recessed in direct comparison and has much rougher and accentuated treble.
The Sprint’s housing design, while being tougher to achieve proper seal for me, is much more comfortable than the bulbous BLU100 barrel type housings. Even though the Sprint’s built in memory wire help to secure the housings in the ear, I prefer the easier to maneuver non-memory wired flat cable of the BLU100 for it’s ease of use. I typically do not like flat cables but this one is pretty narrow and pliable, so the main difference in usability is the memory wire of the Sprint, which really just comes down to preference. The BLU100 inline remote buttons are smaller and more spaced out; while maintaining a similarly small remote the BLU100 have the more typical up arrow, end/answer call, down arrow configuration. I found the BLU100 remote a little easier to navigate but that’s really due to me using that style layout for many years with Apple iDevices. When it comes to connectivity stability, the Sprint is head and shoulders above the BLU100.
Summary
Pros: The Axgio Sprint is a stable, reliable Bluetooth headset with a balanced and neutral approach to sound quality. It excels in overall comfort and it’s most notable sound attribute is its lovely midrange clarity.
Cons: Its nozzle angle could cause difficulty achieving proper seal and it could use increased levels of deep bass for noisy environments.
As of this writing, the Sprint is selling for $39.99 on Amazon, which makes it a very affordable option in a burgeoning budget Bluetooth headset market.
Disclaimer: The Axgio Sprint headset reviewed here was supplied free of charge
I’ve never heard of Axgio, much less their Sprint Bluetooth headset. A quick Google search turns up a company that specializes in smartphones and smartphone accessories. Apparently Axgio not only makes smartphone hardware but has designed their own Android based OS named Neonado.
The Sprint is an in-ear monitor headset that boasts an IPX4 rating for water resistance, thus it’s marketed as sports headset that is ultimately sweat-proof and durable enough to withstand tough workouts and more. Other manufacturer specifications are as follows:
Chip: CSR8645 (with AptX)
Bluetooth Version: 4.1
Profile Supported: HSP, HFP, A2DP and AVRCP
Battery Capacity: 130mAh
Charging time: about 2 hr
Charging port: USB cable
Music time: 8hr
Talk time: 8hr
Driver Unit: 7mm (SPK)
Fit and Aesthetics
The 7mm dynamic drivers are protected in a black and nickel colored, sealed plastic pill shaped housing. Being that they are sealed housings, I do get a bit of occasional driver flex but nothing concerning. The housings are designed to be ergonomic and comfortably sit in the concha of the ear. While indeed very comfortable, I do have issue attaining proper seal with the nozzle angling away from the housing. I’ve experienced this same nozzle angle on some universal IEM’s in the past and also found fit to be hit or miss. Due to this nozzle angle, it makes deeper, more secure fit, pretty much impossible for me, as well as impacting the type of tip I could use and still maintain proper seal. This may not be an issue for many or even most users, as I have pretty straight and wide canals. Users with smaller canals and/or greatly curved canals will appreciate the ease of shallow fit.
Rather than the typical strain relief existing the housings, the cable has about 3.5 inches of built in memory wire. Since the Sprint is designed to be worn over-the-ear, the memory wire is well thought out to hold the short cable between the two housings in place. The rest of the cable is slightly rubbery to the touch and very pliable. Located approximately 6 inches from the right housing are the inline controls. Placement is very good- far enough away, so as not to be too close to the ear but also not so far it starts to go behind your neck, should you wear the Sprint that way. The cable also has a little clip built in for storage purposes.
Accessories
Rounding out the accessories are a USB charging cable, 4 pair of silicone tips (XS, S, M and L) and 3 pair of foam tips (S, M, and L). The foam tips are not your typical Comply tips. These have a thicker, slicker coating over the foam that helps it rebound its shape much quicker. These foam tips are the only tips that would give me a somewhat easy to maintain fit with the angled nozzle. Other tips I tried just take too much fiddling to try and obtain a consistent and proper seal. Surprisingly there is no carrying case included. This is really a pretty important oversight, as I tend to carry the headset and the charging cable with me.
Bluetooth and Controls
Inline controls are pretty straight forward, if a bit odd in button placement. Being so used to most Apple controls having the volume buttons at the top and bottom with the on/off in the center, I often found myself forgetting and accidentally pressing the wrong button. I can’t tell you how many times I started to redial last number. However, once you get used to these differences, operation is actually very simple.
The bottom on/off button also controls pairing (long hold past powering on), as well as the standard answer/end call and last number redial via a double press. Volume buttons also act as next song/previous song buttons with double presses.
Bluetooth connectivity worked flawlessly for me. Unlike the Brainwavz BLU100, I never had any drop-outs, static or other noise interference and the unit didn’t mind if I had other devices in my Bluetooth list. While I didn’t test the limits of the Bluetooth distance, I never had any issues laying my iPhone down and walking across the room to pick something up. Battery life is claimed to be 8 hours and I’d estimate it to be pretty accurate. I tend to listen a few hours a day and wouldn’t need to charge for several days at a time.
Sound Quality
Upon first using the Sprint headset, my first initial take away was surprise; this isn’t your typical consumer tuning. It’s actually quite balanced and, dare I say, fairly neutral. On top of that, the clarity throughout, but especially in the midrange, is quite impressive.
Bass
These are not your typical bloated, boom, boom dynamic drivers. Bass is light and nimble, although it does roll off in deep and sub bass pretty quickly. Bass is fairly balanced with the midrange and treble while indoors where ambient noise is considerably quieter. I’d prefer a bit more quantity in deep bass and sub bass, especially when commuting, traveling or doing anything in an outdoor area, as those are first frequencies to be lost in noisy environments. Otherwise bass speed and tautness is rather good. No bloat or masking to affect other frequencies. Bassheads will not be satisfied by any stretch.
Midrange and Treble
The Sprint’s specialty is vocals- acoustic and singer/songwriter music really shines. The midrange is exceptionally clear and open sounding. I find it neither forward, nor recessed but very well balanced with treble levels, for a nice and even sound from lower midrange on up through the upper most treble extension. Treble is articulate and smooth with plenty of sparkle and air. At times there can be just the smallest edge of brightness, mainly as a psychoacoustic effect of being fairly bass-light, especially in commute environs.
Comparisons – BrainWavz BLU100
If the Sprint is balanced and fairly neutral, then the BLU100 sounds overtly V shaped in direct comparison. However the BLU100’s fuller and richer bass is welcomed when listening outdoors or on the daily commute. Where the Sprint pull ahead is with its crystal clear midrange and much smoother, more articulate treble. The BLU100 vocals sound pretty recessed in direct comparison and has much rougher and accentuated treble.
The Sprint’s housing design, while being tougher to achieve proper seal for me, is much more comfortable than the bulbous BLU100 barrel type housings. Even though the Sprint’s built in memory wire help to secure the housings in the ear, I prefer the easier to maneuver non-memory wired flat cable of the BLU100 for it’s ease of use. I typically do not like flat cables but this one is pretty narrow and pliable, so the main difference in usability is the memory wire of the Sprint, which really just comes down to preference. The BLU100 inline remote buttons are smaller and more spaced out; while maintaining a similarly small remote the BLU100 have the more typical up arrow, end/answer call, down arrow configuration. I found the BLU100 remote a little easier to navigate but that’s really due to me using that style layout for many years with Apple iDevices. When it comes to connectivity stability, the Sprint is head and shoulders above the BLU100.
Summary
Pros: The Axgio Sprint is a stable, reliable Bluetooth headset with a balanced and neutral approach to sound quality. It excels in overall comfort and it’s most notable sound attribute is its lovely midrange clarity.
Cons: Its nozzle angle could cause difficulty achieving proper seal and it could use increased levels of deep bass for noisy environments.
As of this writing, the Sprint is selling for $39.99 on Amazon, which makes it a very affordable option in a burgeoning budget Bluetooth headset market.
Brainwavz BLU-100 Bluetooth In Ears
Foreword
When Brainwavz contacted me about reviewing a set bluetooth in-ears, I have to admit I was bit apprehensive. Having never used bluetooth in ears but having used plenty of portable bluetooth iPhone speakers and in car audio set ups, bluetooth, while convenient, to my ears has been clearly a step back from a wired connection. Could Brainwavz change my mixed bag of feelings towards bluetooth?
Accessories
MSRP pricing for the BLU-100 is $44.50 but mp4nation is currently running a pre-order special for $10 off. My review unit arrived without retail packaging. Everything came packed in the roomy and now standard black and red Brainwavz semi-hard carrying case. This case is great for when not only carrying iems but extra tips, cables, miniature daps like the shuffle, etc. Accessories include a usb charging cable, velcro tie for iem storage, 1pr ‘ear clips’, 3 sets of silicone tips and 1 set of medium S series 400 Comply tips. While not as robust a set of tips as previous Brainwavz offerings, it’s still well appointed considering the price point of the BLU-100.
Specifications
Usage
Tips of choice where the stock large silicones and comfort is above average. While the metal housings are quite large, to accommodate the battery, they are fairly lightweight and are easy to wear both down or up without fatigue. The cable completely disappears when placed behind the neck. Microphone placement is spaced better for wearing down but isn’t too bad for over the ear wear. Isolation is slightly above average for a dynamic driver, due to its sealed design. Once the musics starts, the outside world is gone. The BLU-100 seems to work best when most items are removed from the phone pairing list or at least it seemed I had fewer dropouts when they were removed. Battery life seems to be spot on to the manufacturer rating.
Sound
The review was conduced solely using an iPhone 5s at medium to lower listen volumes.
The overall signature of the BLU-100 is decidedly V shaped with prominent bass, relaxed mids and sparkly treble. While bass and treble can become somewhat overbearing at very loud listening levels, the V shaped signature works quite well at medium and lower volume levels. Best of all the midrange is very clear for a pleasant vocal performance in both music and phone calls.
Bass levels are not quite as elevated as S5 and S0 levels, nor do they dig as deep as the S5 but you can definitely hear the family similarities. While the BLU-100 bass is more mid based focused, it does have nice depth and texture. The midrange sits nicely between the more recessed S5 and more forward S0. While midrange detail levels aren’t quite to the level of the S5 and S0, it’s certainly not very far behind. Vocals sound natural, full and well bodied. Treble, though, is a bit of a mixed bag. At louder levels its a bit splashy with some resonances, similar to the S5 but not quite as refined as the S5’s treble. This is where the S0 is clearly the winner in the family sound, for me, with a smoother, less resonant and more refined treble than its brethren. But at lower listening levels, the resonances of the BLU-100 tend to recede greatly in the background and you are left with a nice complimentary sparkle. If you are a fan of either the S5 or S0, you should find the BLU-100 very pleasing, especially at lower volumes where it really excels.
Conclusion
Did the BLU-100 change my mind on bluetooth audio? Yes and no. It’s clearly better sound quality than some of the iPhone speakers I’ve used and car audio connections I have experience with. However the more than occasional dropouts were pretty annoying and happened much more often than from those same iPhone speakers and car audio connections, which really were a rarity. All that being said, there is definitely a strong argument to made for just having a super short cable resting behind your neck. Comfort was truly excellent! If Brainwavz can improve connectivity issues and give me a sound closer to their S0 model, which I personally prefer over their other models, I’d be completely sold. At the end of the day, the BLU-100 is a solid product of great value at MSRP and practically a no brainer at pre-order special for those wanting the ultimate in cable freedom.
Foreword
When Brainwavz contacted me about reviewing a set bluetooth in-ears, I have to admit I was bit apprehensive. Having never used bluetooth in ears but having used plenty of portable bluetooth iPhone speakers and in car audio set ups, bluetooth, while convenient, to my ears has been clearly a step back from a wired connection. Could Brainwavz change my mixed bag of feelings towards bluetooth?
Accessories
MSRP pricing for the BLU-100 is $44.50 but mp4nation is currently running a pre-order special for $10 off. My review unit arrived without retail packaging. Everything came packed in the roomy and now standard black and red Brainwavz semi-hard carrying case. This case is great for when not only carrying iems but extra tips, cables, miniature daps like the shuffle, etc. Accessories include a usb charging cable, velcro tie for iem storage, 1pr ‘ear clips’, 3 sets of silicone tips and 1 set of medium S series 400 Comply tips. While not as robust a set of tips as previous Brainwavz offerings, it’s still well appointed considering the price point of the BLU-100.
Specifications
- 8mm dynamic driver
- 30 ohm impendance
- 110db at 1mW sensitivity
- Bluetooth 4.0 (CSRBC8645) with aptX
- 30ft max operating distance
- 60mAh battery - 4hrs playtime
- 2hrs charging / 100 hrs standby
- HFP, HSP and A2DP support
- 2 device simultaneous pairing
- 3 button remote works with iOS, Android and Windows phones
- 1 year warranty
Usage
Tips of choice where the stock large silicones and comfort is above average. While the metal housings are quite large, to accommodate the battery, they are fairly lightweight and are easy to wear both down or up without fatigue. The cable completely disappears when placed behind the neck. Microphone placement is spaced better for wearing down but isn’t too bad for over the ear wear. Isolation is slightly above average for a dynamic driver, due to its sealed design. Once the musics starts, the outside world is gone. The BLU-100 seems to work best when most items are removed from the phone pairing list or at least it seemed I had fewer dropouts when they were removed. Battery life seems to be spot on to the manufacturer rating.
Sound
The review was conduced solely using an iPhone 5s at medium to lower listen volumes.
The overall signature of the BLU-100 is decidedly V shaped with prominent bass, relaxed mids and sparkly treble. While bass and treble can become somewhat overbearing at very loud listening levels, the V shaped signature works quite well at medium and lower volume levels. Best of all the midrange is very clear for a pleasant vocal performance in both music and phone calls.
Bass levels are not quite as elevated as S5 and S0 levels, nor do they dig as deep as the S5 but you can definitely hear the family similarities. While the BLU-100 bass is more mid based focused, it does have nice depth and texture. The midrange sits nicely between the more recessed S5 and more forward S0. While midrange detail levels aren’t quite to the level of the S5 and S0, it’s certainly not very far behind. Vocals sound natural, full and well bodied. Treble, though, is a bit of a mixed bag. At louder levels its a bit splashy with some resonances, similar to the S5 but not quite as refined as the S5’s treble. This is where the S0 is clearly the winner in the family sound, for me, with a smoother, less resonant and more refined treble than its brethren. But at lower listening levels, the resonances of the BLU-100 tend to recede greatly in the background and you are left with a nice complimentary sparkle. If you are a fan of either the S5 or S0, you should find the BLU-100 very pleasing, especially at lower volumes where it really excels.
Conclusion
Did the BLU-100 change my mind on bluetooth audio? Yes and no. It’s clearly better sound quality than some of the iPhone speakers I’ve used and car audio connections I have experience with. However the more than occasional dropouts were pretty annoying and happened much more often than from those same iPhone speakers and car audio connections, which really were a rarity. All that being said, there is definitely a strong argument to made for just having a super short cable resting behind your neck. Comfort was truly excellent! If Brainwavz can improve connectivity issues and give me a sound closer to their S0 model, which I personally prefer over their other models, I’d be completely sold. At the end of the day, the BLU-100 is a solid product of great value at MSRP and practically a no brainer at pre-order special for those wanting the ultimate in cable freedom.
zzffnn
Great review! I also had connection issues: http://www.head-fi.org/t/765621/brainwavz-blu-100-bluetooth-in-ear-monitors-discussion-thread/30#post_11662813
Brainwavz M1 – Clean and Clear
Disclaimer: Brainwavz supplied the M1 for this review
Brainwavz markets the M1 as “having a wide sound stage, accurate sound reproduction, good separation. The M1 are designed to reproduce sound with clarity and cleanness…”. I’m impressed! This is pretty much a spot on description of what the M1 sonically has to offer, but before I add my two cents on its sonics, let’s explore the other aspects of the M1.
Specifications
- 10.7mm dynamic driver
- Impedance: 32 ohm
- Frequency Range: 20Hz-20kHz
- Sensitivity: 110 dB @ 1 mW
- Rated Input Power: 10 mW
- Street Price: $44.50
Build
The M1 housings are small and well made. They can accommodate wearing it down or over the ear without issue. The cable is a thin but seeming durable cable made of silver plated (SPC) wire. The cable is a mixed bag- while it looks good and feels good, it’s pretty stiff, full of memory and is a tangle prone monster. Surprisingly it does not have a slider after the Y-split. I’ve never understood why sliders are left off some earphones? The cable is terminated in a small 45 degree angled plug. I wear IEM’s exclusively over the ear, so microphonics are usually a non-factor for me and it’s not different for me with the M1.
Accessories
The M1 I received came in the retail packaging. Included is the same great Brainwavz carrying case that seems to be included with every monitor in their line up now. Inside the carrying case were 6 pair of single flange silicone tips, 1 pair of dual flange tips and 1 pair of S series Comply. A shirt clip was also included. With all those tips, for this review, I ended up using some extra T series Comply I had on hand.
Sound
The M1 is very clean sounding with zero resonances, vibrations and reverbs often found in this price bracket. Treble is polite but extended and very clean. Midrange is prominent and plainly the focus of the presentation, yet clean and clear without aggressiveness or forwardness. Bass is underemphasized, yet punchy with deep bass roll off beginning around 100 hz. At first blush it seems rather neutral-ish but in reality I find it fairly mid-centric with less than neutral deep bass.
While sounding extremely clean and clear, notes are thinner and lack body overall compared to most in this price bracket. Stage lacks height with average depth but sounds absolutely and fantastically wide open. Even though the midrange is the focus of the signature, the stage placement still seems somewhat a bit away from the listener; mid-centric without the typical associated intimacy or feeling closed in. As long as one isn’t expecting to find elevated bass or typical consumer tunings, the M1 is extremely pleasing and easy to enjoy.
Select Comparisons
Brainwavz S0
Upon first transition, the S0 almost sounds like a bass monster compared to the laidback and reserved M1. Once the mind adjust, the S0 just sounds more full bodied with richer and thicker overall notes. Staging seems closer with larger proportions. Next to the M1, the S0 doesn’t sound as clean and has some bass reverberations and lower treble resonance that are more easily noticeable against the super clean and clear M1. S0 bass extends much deeper but M1 treble seems to extend perhaps just a bit better, while both treble presentations are laid back and easy to listen to. The S0 is just much more powerful and dynamic sounding. The laid back but clear nature of the M1 makes it really good for low volume, background listening.
SoundMagic E30
This is a much easier transition to make, as the E30 is a more balanced signature and closer to the M1 than the S0’s bassier, thicker nature. The E30 also comes closer to the cleaner and clearer presentation of the M1 than does the S0. The E30 almost seems slightly V shaped in comparison upon transition. While notes are a little thicker and fuller with the E30, it’s not as drastic as with the S0. Also noticeable is the greater treble emphasis of the E30; extension isn’t really any better, just overall all presence is more elevated next to the more laidback M1. Staging on the E30 is obviously closer to the listener with just slightly larger proportions all the way around.
Of interesting note, the E30 cable is similar to the M1 cable, in that both having annoying memory and both being tangle prone. The M1 cable though certainly looks and feels more premium next to the rubbery E30 cable.
Conclusion
Bravo to Brainwavz for providing one of the more accurate and complete marketing descriptions I’ve read. The M1 is a perhaps a good introduction for those wanting to experience a more neutral presentation in a sea of offerings with bassier, more consumer oriented turnings. The M1 is also recommended for background and low volume listening while perhaps studying or sleeping.
Disclaimer: Brainwavz supplied the M1 for this review
Brainwavz markets the M1 as “having a wide sound stage, accurate sound reproduction, good separation. The M1 are designed to reproduce sound with clarity and cleanness…”. I’m impressed! This is pretty much a spot on description of what the M1 sonically has to offer, but before I add my two cents on its sonics, let’s explore the other aspects of the M1.
Specifications
- 10.7mm dynamic driver
- Impedance: 32 ohm
- Frequency Range: 20Hz-20kHz
- Sensitivity: 110 dB @ 1 mW
- Rated Input Power: 10 mW
- Street Price: $44.50
Build
The M1 housings are small and well made. They can accommodate wearing it down or over the ear without issue. The cable is a thin but seeming durable cable made of silver plated (SPC) wire. The cable is a mixed bag- while it looks good and feels good, it’s pretty stiff, full of memory and is a tangle prone monster. Surprisingly it does not have a slider after the Y-split. I’ve never understood why sliders are left off some earphones? The cable is terminated in a small 45 degree angled plug. I wear IEM’s exclusively over the ear, so microphonics are usually a non-factor for me and it’s not different for me with the M1.
Accessories
The M1 I received came in the retail packaging. Included is the same great Brainwavz carrying case that seems to be included with every monitor in their line up now. Inside the carrying case were 6 pair of single flange silicone tips, 1 pair of dual flange tips and 1 pair of S series Comply. A shirt clip was also included. With all those tips, for this review, I ended up using some extra T series Comply I had on hand.
Sound
The M1 is very clean sounding with zero resonances, vibrations and reverbs often found in this price bracket. Treble is polite but extended and very clean. Midrange is prominent and plainly the focus of the presentation, yet clean and clear without aggressiveness or forwardness. Bass is underemphasized, yet punchy with deep bass roll off beginning around 100 hz. At first blush it seems rather neutral-ish but in reality I find it fairly mid-centric with less than neutral deep bass.
While sounding extremely clean and clear, notes are thinner and lack body overall compared to most in this price bracket. Stage lacks height with average depth but sounds absolutely and fantastically wide open. Even though the midrange is the focus of the signature, the stage placement still seems somewhat a bit away from the listener; mid-centric without the typical associated intimacy or feeling closed in. As long as one isn’t expecting to find elevated bass or typical consumer tunings, the M1 is extremely pleasing and easy to enjoy.
Select Comparisons
Brainwavz S0
Upon first transition, the S0 almost sounds like a bass monster compared to the laidback and reserved M1. Once the mind adjust, the S0 just sounds more full bodied with richer and thicker overall notes. Staging seems closer with larger proportions. Next to the M1, the S0 doesn’t sound as clean and has some bass reverberations and lower treble resonance that are more easily noticeable against the super clean and clear M1. S0 bass extends much deeper but M1 treble seems to extend perhaps just a bit better, while both treble presentations are laid back and easy to listen to. The S0 is just much more powerful and dynamic sounding. The laid back but clear nature of the M1 makes it really good for low volume, background listening.
SoundMagic E30
This is a much easier transition to make, as the E30 is a more balanced signature and closer to the M1 than the S0’s bassier, thicker nature. The E30 also comes closer to the cleaner and clearer presentation of the M1 than does the S0. The E30 almost seems slightly V shaped in comparison upon transition. While notes are a little thicker and fuller with the E30, it’s not as drastic as with the S0. Also noticeable is the greater treble emphasis of the E30; extension isn’t really any better, just overall all presence is more elevated next to the more laidback M1. Staging on the E30 is obviously closer to the listener with just slightly larger proportions all the way around.
Of interesting note, the E30 cable is similar to the M1 cable, in that both having annoying memory and both being tangle prone. The M1 cable though certainly looks and feels more premium next to the rubbery E30 cable.
Conclusion
Bravo to Brainwavz for providing one of the more accurate and complete marketing descriptions I’ve read. The M1 is a perhaps a good introduction for those wanting to experience a more neutral presentation in a sea of offerings with bassier, more consumer oriented turnings. The M1 is also recommended for background and low volume listening while perhaps studying or sleeping.
The Supra reviewed below is a production sample from the Kickstarter campaign and further details on the specs and configuration can be found there. This review consists of some comparisons and tip recommendations.
Manufacturer specifications:
Driver Configuration: Single High, Single Low. 2-Way, Passive Crossover Network.
Frequency Response: 20 Hz - 18 kHz
Impedance: 23 ohms @ 1 kHz
Sensitivity: 126 dB @ 1 kHz
Noise Isolation: 28 dB, +/-2 dB
Input Connector: 1/8" (3.5 mm) Gold Plated
EarWerkz Supra vs Aurisonics Rockets
Tips: Comply T series on Supra and Sennheiser biflanges on Rockets.
Sensitivity: Supra is more sensitive and Rockets require about 5 more clicks on the iPhone for similar volume.
Source: iPhone 5S
Bass quantity isn’t too far off, with the Rockets seemingly having a hair more, but focus of bass is a little different. The Supra bass seems more linear without any roll off in sub bass, whereas the Rockets bass seem to have a bit more mid and upper bass presence, and slight roll off under 50hz. The Supra bass feels lighter on its feet, quicker, with better deep bass rumble. The Rocket bass feel fuller with more punch and with a bit more decay in direct comparison.
The midrange of the Supra immediately strikes you with its clarity and airy nature. There is absolutely no masking from bass or treble, just pure, innocent clarity. In contrast, the Rockets bring the midrange slightly forward of neutral and vocal intimacy is its bread and butter. Here the Rockets carry a slightly thicker note, which accentuates the lovely vocal intimacy but it doesn’t have the clarity, airiness of the Supra. The Rocket note through the midrange is softer in character, with rolled, smoothed edges. In direct comparison the Supra’s midrange is sharper in character (not to be confused with harsh), like someone who enunciates every syllable perfectly or perhaps etched in space.
While the midrange is the first focus for me, it’s treble that makes or breaks an iem for me over the long haul. Odd peaks or dips really grate on my nerves. The Supra treble is super airy and sparkly but never sounds harsh or piercing to me. It takes what I loved about the K3003 treble but tones it down a bit, making sure to never cross the line to shrill and annoying. The airiness, the sparkle, the brassy tone, all without any of the nasties that can easily be found in many iems. The Rockets also have that fantastically realistic, brassy tone but do not possess the soaring air of the Supra. This is part of what gives the Supra its wide open feel and what I instantly fell in love with and raved about during the EP-2 demo.
As many of you may know, distortion guitar crunch and texture is something I pay very close attention to, as most of library consist of guitar driven rock. The Supra’s clear and bright nature produce superb distortion guitars. Grit and crunch are abundantly clear with razor sharp definition. Even though the Rockets are softer and thicker through the midrange, it also has a rawness to its upper midrange, producing very believable distortion guitars with excellent sustain but grit and crunch lag a little behind the Supra here.
Following my focus on distortion guitars, next up are acoustic guitars. The Rockets really shine here in note weight, sustain of string vibrations and realism of fingers sliding over the fretboard. The airier nature of the Supra produces these same sounds just a bit thinner and sharper, falling just short of the Rockets realism.
I chose to do my first comparison with the Rockets because it’s one of my favorite iems I’ve ever heard in all my time on Head-Fi. It’s a serious bang for buck offering that competes well above its point in my opinion. Well, I feel the same way about the Supra. Very few iem I’ve heard in any price bracket offer the sense of clarity, air and openness the Supra possess. When it comes to much pricier models and offerings, sure those will possess some technical proficiencies in resolution, layering or imaging but when it comes to value and performance, as well as some of the best tonality on the market, it just doesn’t get any better than the Rockets, and now the Supra.
Supra vs TDK BA200
Tips: Vsonic GR07 silicone on the Supra and MH1 silicone on the BA200
Source: iPhone 5S
Sensitivity: The Supra is more sensitive than the BA200 by about 3 volume clicks of the iPhone.
I chose the BA200 to test against since it is not only another dual BA universal (using different drivers) but also has a pretty linear and neutral signature. Instant impressions are that these two share a lot of similarities in overall signature but with some fairly wide gaps in overall performance.
Bass levels are very similar with the Supra having more overall weight that packs a better punch and deep bass grunt. The Supra bass also seems noticeably faster and cleaner next to the BA200’s warmer and softer, perhaps polite, feeling bass. The Supra just seems more precise and clean here with better bass texturing.
The BA200 midrange is ever so slightly more forward than the Supra. Its vocals come across with a touch more intimacy and a kind of ethereal warmness. In contrast the Supra’s midrange is a little more laid back but noticeably clearer, more resolving and better defined with feeling of crispness- Supra distortion guitars have more bite and crunch; toms and snares have more snap.
The treble on the BA200 is smooth, even and pretty well extended but next to to the Supra treble, it seems a bit dull and closed in. The Supra treble adds a sense of air and extra sparkle missing from the BA200 and as a consequence sounds more open, articulate and resolving.
Where the Supra really separates itself from the BA200 is in imaging, layering and staging. The Supra is just simply better at creating a mental image with more precision to instrument placement and space between the instruments than the BA200. Not only does it sound more open but depth is significantly better on the Supra.
The TDK BA200 is one of the better dual BA universals I’ve tried or owned and is a considerable value, especially when compared to similar offerings from Westone and Earsonics. The EarWerkz Supra however is clearly on another performance level.
Supra vs UERM
Tips: Vsonic GR07 silicone on Supra. UERM is a full custom.
Source: iPhone 5S
Sensitivity: The Supra is more sensitive than the UERM by about 2 clicks of volume on the iPhone
As suspected these two have a lot of similarities and referring to the Supra as baby UERM or perhaps a little brother to the UERM is not far off the mark at all. What was somewhat surprising was how much larger in scope the UERM sounds. For all the openness and air I’ve mentioned of the Supra, the UERM is somehow even more open and larger sounding, adding another dimension of realism.
The second thing I noticed was the exquisite balance of frequencies the UERM possesses. While having just a little less bass and treble emphasis as the Supra, the UERM is yet more dynamic, displays a more delicate nature and a greater sense of effortlessness. All this adds up to the next step in resolution, layering and staging. Next to the UERM the Supra shows itself as the enthusiastic little brother, quite capable but perhaps a more brash and unpolished version of its older sibling.
The Supra makes a great back up to the UERM, especially for say travel or other activities where you might not want to take your more expensive purchases, and still maintain somewhat similar signatures and approaches to neutrality. Obviously the Supra would be a much cheaper way of getting a taste of what the UERM brings to the table as well.
Supra Ear-tips Roundup
Choose your favorite lure from the tackle box
I spent the morning perusing my ear-tip collection and thought I'd share the results, since many were wondering about using other tips than Comply. There were many that fit but didn't sound good enough to include in the details below. There were also many that just have too big a bore to use without a make-shift adapter of some sort. I found those to not really gain any substantive improvement over the tips that fit without modification, so I've not included those as well. What I have included are 12 pair of the best performing tips, for me, that fit the Supra nozzle without modification.
The Supra come with Comply T400 foam tips. I find the Compy tips to sound excellent. Some may be concerned about treble attenuation due to foam overhang but that is not the case here. The tips slide all the way down the nozzle and there is very, very little foam remaining past the nozzle opening. I will refer to these as the stock tips in the roundup and all other tip sound changes will be based upon how the stock Comply tips sound. The blue foam tips pictured above are the large version of the T400 and they will be separately covered below.
In general the main difference I find, across all iems, between silicone and foam are as follows:
Foam bass has a softer edged note with no extra reverb or bounce to the sound. I find this is due to their more porous and absorbing nature, whereas silicone tends to seal tighter with the least air leakage for me (assuming perfect fit/seal). Silicone bass tends to sound ever so slightly harder hitting, with harder edged bass notes that can at times have a bounce or reverb to the bass. It's subtle, most noticeable in direct a/b with foam, and I don't always detect it. Treble can also be affected the same way to my ears. Treble can sound cleaner and smoother with foam, IF there is no foam overhang affecting attenuation. If an iem treble is naturally hot or tizzy, silicone can at times exacerbate this for me. Though at the end of the day I tend to prefer silicone tips, due to better ease of quick fit, more bore width choices and more length/depth of fit choices, which can help me taylor the overall sound with a bit more precision.
Exhibit #1
Top Row: Phonak Audeo PFE silicone, Spin-fit silicone, Sony MH1 silicone
Bottom Row: Earsonics Bi-flange silicone, Meelec Bi-flange silicone, Sony Hybrid silicone
Starting on the top row with the Phonak Audeo PFE silicone tips, I found these to produce the most U shaped frequency response of the bunch. They gave perhaps the most suction like seal of all the tips with the strongest, hardest hitting bass and treble emphasis. While fun sounding for some songs, they would not be my tip of choice for the Supra, especially for longer listening sessions.
Second on the top row are the Spin-fit tips. Unfortunately the Spin-fits run a little on the small size, so these medium tips were a little too loose in my ear, requiring the deepest fit of all the tips in order to get a decent seal. I suspect if I had large Spin-fits they might indeed be winners as comfort level match Ortofon tips (Ortofon tips are not included in the roundup due to too loose a fit on the Supra nozzle). Treble was just ever so slightly attenuated compared to the stock tips but not as attenuated as the Sony or Earsonic tips. Bass was somewhat lighter due to the less than ideal seal; again, I think larges would have made all the difference in the world here.
Last on the top row are the Sony MH1 tips. These are very, very similar to the Sony Hybrids with a slightly more rigid silicone structure. The smaller bore attenuates treble a bit more from the Spin-fits over stock tips and some may prefer this. Bass hits harder than stock and fit is easily one of the more comfortable fits. I can see these being a community favorite.
Starting on the bottom row are the Earsonics Bi-flange tips. These give the most treble attenuation of the roundup due to having the smallest bore and the deepest fit. Due to the attenuated treble, these also sound more on the bassy side. I found these too dark for my preferences, robbing some of the Supra's magical air, but if one is adverse to treble brightness, they would be worth looking into.
Second on the bottom are what I believe to be Meelec Bi-flanges. I seem to have two kinds of Meelec Bi-flanges- some that the bore is too wide to fit on the Supra nozzle, and this pair which seems to fit perfectly. I'm unsure which model this particular pair fits in the Meelec product range. These tips provide a very comfortable fit for bi-flanges and are one of my favorites on the Supra. Overall sound is balanced with similar bass emphasis as stock tips and perhaps just a hair less treble emphasis due to slightly deeper fit.
Last on the bottom are the Sony Hybrids. See above for MH1 sound, as the Hybrid sound is identical. The only difference is the softer silicone, providing a more comfortable fit that rivals the comfort of foam.
Exhibit #2
Top Row: Jays Foam (discontinued), HiFiman Bi-flange silicone
Bottom Row: Comply T400 foam (stock tips), Jays Silicone
Starting on the top row are the Jays Foam. Unfortunately these appear to be discontinued, as I haven't seen them available anywhere for the last year. They have a fairly dense foam and provide a slightly bigger bass presence over stock and treble sounds pretty similar, but due to their blunt shape, I find them a hassle to get proper fit.
Last on the top are the HiFiman Bi-flange tips. These are probably overkill for the Supra, unless you have very large ear canals, as their bulk will push the Supra out a little further from the ear. Bass was similar to the Sony tips but with similar treble levels to the stock tips. As just mentioned, these should probably only be considered if you have really large canals and most tips are too small for you.
Starting on the bottom row are the stock Comply T400. As mentioned before, these sound excellent to my ears. Bass is clean and fast without any extra ear reverb. Treble is also clean, precise and airy. There is no foam interference across the top of the nozzle to cause treble attenuation issues.
Last on the bottom are the Jays silicone tips, which are still readily available. The Jays tips have the widest bore of all the single flange tips used, therefore they have the brightest treble reproduction, while having similar bass to the Sony tips. Jays silicone tips tend to run on the large size. The large pictured are more like an XL. Jays silicone is one of the thicker, more firmer tips. If you find Sony's too supple and leak too easy, then Jays may be a good choice.
Exhibit #3
Left: Comply TS400 Foam
Right: Vsonic GR07 Silicone
On the left are Comply TS400 foam tips. I tend to prefer this shape of Comply on the Supra, as I can get a better seal and tighter fit with the rounded shape of the TS series. Sound is identical to the stock tips and one of my top 2 choices for the Supra.
On the right are the original Vsonic GR07 silicone tips. These are not Sony knock-offs but Vsonic's own unique tip. The bore is halfway between the Jays silicone and Sony tips, which gives me the most similar treble presence to the stock tips. Bass is similar to the Jays and Sony tips as well. The Vsonic silicone is firmer, like the Jays silicone, but gives me a comfortable and tight seal. Currently these tips are the other of my top 2 choices for the Supra.
So to conclude, I find Comply TS400 and the original Vsonic GR07 silicone tips to be my favorites, with stock tips, Sony MH1 and Hybrids, Meelec Bi-flange as well as Jays silicone all coming close but just shy of my top two.
Manufacturer specifications:
Driver Configuration: Single High, Single Low. 2-Way, Passive Crossover Network.
Frequency Response: 20 Hz - 18 kHz
Impedance: 23 ohms @ 1 kHz
Sensitivity: 126 dB @ 1 kHz
Noise Isolation: 28 dB, +/-2 dB
Input Connector: 1/8" (3.5 mm) Gold Plated
EarWerkz Supra vs Aurisonics Rockets
Tips: Comply T series on Supra and Sennheiser biflanges on Rockets.
Sensitivity: Supra is more sensitive and Rockets require about 5 more clicks on the iPhone for similar volume.
Source: iPhone 5S
Bass quantity isn’t too far off, with the Rockets seemingly having a hair more, but focus of bass is a little different. The Supra bass seems more linear without any roll off in sub bass, whereas the Rockets bass seem to have a bit more mid and upper bass presence, and slight roll off under 50hz. The Supra bass feels lighter on its feet, quicker, with better deep bass rumble. The Rocket bass feel fuller with more punch and with a bit more decay in direct comparison.
The midrange of the Supra immediately strikes you with its clarity and airy nature. There is absolutely no masking from bass or treble, just pure, innocent clarity. In contrast, the Rockets bring the midrange slightly forward of neutral and vocal intimacy is its bread and butter. Here the Rockets carry a slightly thicker note, which accentuates the lovely vocal intimacy but it doesn’t have the clarity, airiness of the Supra. The Rocket note through the midrange is softer in character, with rolled, smoothed edges. In direct comparison the Supra’s midrange is sharper in character (not to be confused with harsh), like someone who enunciates every syllable perfectly or perhaps etched in space.
While the midrange is the first focus for me, it’s treble that makes or breaks an iem for me over the long haul. Odd peaks or dips really grate on my nerves. The Supra treble is super airy and sparkly but never sounds harsh or piercing to me. It takes what I loved about the K3003 treble but tones it down a bit, making sure to never cross the line to shrill and annoying. The airiness, the sparkle, the brassy tone, all without any of the nasties that can easily be found in many iems. The Rockets also have that fantastically realistic, brassy tone but do not possess the soaring air of the Supra. This is part of what gives the Supra its wide open feel and what I instantly fell in love with and raved about during the EP-2 demo.
As many of you may know, distortion guitar crunch and texture is something I pay very close attention to, as most of library consist of guitar driven rock. The Supra’s clear and bright nature produce superb distortion guitars. Grit and crunch are abundantly clear with razor sharp definition. Even though the Rockets are softer and thicker through the midrange, it also has a rawness to its upper midrange, producing very believable distortion guitars with excellent sustain but grit and crunch lag a little behind the Supra here.
Following my focus on distortion guitars, next up are acoustic guitars. The Rockets really shine here in note weight, sustain of string vibrations and realism of fingers sliding over the fretboard. The airier nature of the Supra produces these same sounds just a bit thinner and sharper, falling just short of the Rockets realism.
I chose to do my first comparison with the Rockets because it’s one of my favorite iems I’ve ever heard in all my time on Head-Fi. It’s a serious bang for buck offering that competes well above its point in my opinion. Well, I feel the same way about the Supra. Very few iem I’ve heard in any price bracket offer the sense of clarity, air and openness the Supra possess. When it comes to much pricier models and offerings, sure those will possess some technical proficiencies in resolution, layering or imaging but when it comes to value and performance, as well as some of the best tonality on the market, it just doesn’t get any better than the Rockets, and now the Supra.
Supra vs TDK BA200
Tips: Vsonic GR07 silicone on the Supra and MH1 silicone on the BA200
Source: iPhone 5S
Sensitivity: The Supra is more sensitive than the BA200 by about 3 volume clicks of the iPhone.
I chose the BA200 to test against since it is not only another dual BA universal (using different drivers) but also has a pretty linear and neutral signature. Instant impressions are that these two share a lot of similarities in overall signature but with some fairly wide gaps in overall performance.
Bass levels are very similar with the Supra having more overall weight that packs a better punch and deep bass grunt. The Supra bass also seems noticeably faster and cleaner next to the BA200’s warmer and softer, perhaps polite, feeling bass. The Supra just seems more precise and clean here with better bass texturing.
The BA200 midrange is ever so slightly more forward than the Supra. Its vocals come across with a touch more intimacy and a kind of ethereal warmness. In contrast the Supra’s midrange is a little more laid back but noticeably clearer, more resolving and better defined with feeling of crispness- Supra distortion guitars have more bite and crunch; toms and snares have more snap.
The treble on the BA200 is smooth, even and pretty well extended but next to to the Supra treble, it seems a bit dull and closed in. The Supra treble adds a sense of air and extra sparkle missing from the BA200 and as a consequence sounds more open, articulate and resolving.
Where the Supra really separates itself from the BA200 is in imaging, layering and staging. The Supra is just simply better at creating a mental image with more precision to instrument placement and space between the instruments than the BA200. Not only does it sound more open but depth is significantly better on the Supra.
The TDK BA200 is one of the better dual BA universals I’ve tried or owned and is a considerable value, especially when compared to similar offerings from Westone and Earsonics. The EarWerkz Supra however is clearly on another performance level.
Supra vs UERM
Tips: Vsonic GR07 silicone on Supra. UERM is a full custom.
Source: iPhone 5S
Sensitivity: The Supra is more sensitive than the UERM by about 2 clicks of volume on the iPhone
As suspected these two have a lot of similarities and referring to the Supra as baby UERM or perhaps a little brother to the UERM is not far off the mark at all. What was somewhat surprising was how much larger in scope the UERM sounds. For all the openness and air I’ve mentioned of the Supra, the UERM is somehow even more open and larger sounding, adding another dimension of realism.
The second thing I noticed was the exquisite balance of frequencies the UERM possesses. While having just a little less bass and treble emphasis as the Supra, the UERM is yet more dynamic, displays a more delicate nature and a greater sense of effortlessness. All this adds up to the next step in resolution, layering and staging. Next to the UERM the Supra shows itself as the enthusiastic little brother, quite capable but perhaps a more brash and unpolished version of its older sibling.
The Supra makes a great back up to the UERM, especially for say travel or other activities where you might not want to take your more expensive purchases, and still maintain somewhat similar signatures and approaches to neutrality. Obviously the Supra would be a much cheaper way of getting a taste of what the UERM brings to the table as well.
Supra Ear-tips Roundup
Choose your favorite lure from the tackle box
I spent the morning perusing my ear-tip collection and thought I'd share the results, since many were wondering about using other tips than Comply. There were many that fit but didn't sound good enough to include in the details below. There were also many that just have too big a bore to use without a make-shift adapter of some sort. I found those to not really gain any substantive improvement over the tips that fit without modification, so I've not included those as well. What I have included are 12 pair of the best performing tips, for me, that fit the Supra nozzle without modification.
The Supra come with Comply T400 foam tips. I find the Compy tips to sound excellent. Some may be concerned about treble attenuation due to foam overhang but that is not the case here. The tips slide all the way down the nozzle and there is very, very little foam remaining past the nozzle opening. I will refer to these as the stock tips in the roundup and all other tip sound changes will be based upon how the stock Comply tips sound. The blue foam tips pictured above are the large version of the T400 and they will be separately covered below.
In general the main difference I find, across all iems, between silicone and foam are as follows:
Foam bass has a softer edged note with no extra reverb or bounce to the sound. I find this is due to their more porous and absorbing nature, whereas silicone tends to seal tighter with the least air leakage for me (assuming perfect fit/seal). Silicone bass tends to sound ever so slightly harder hitting, with harder edged bass notes that can at times have a bounce or reverb to the bass. It's subtle, most noticeable in direct a/b with foam, and I don't always detect it. Treble can also be affected the same way to my ears. Treble can sound cleaner and smoother with foam, IF there is no foam overhang affecting attenuation. If an iem treble is naturally hot or tizzy, silicone can at times exacerbate this for me. Though at the end of the day I tend to prefer silicone tips, due to better ease of quick fit, more bore width choices and more length/depth of fit choices, which can help me taylor the overall sound with a bit more precision.
Exhibit #1
Top Row: Phonak Audeo PFE silicone, Spin-fit silicone, Sony MH1 silicone
Bottom Row: Earsonics Bi-flange silicone, Meelec Bi-flange silicone, Sony Hybrid silicone
Starting on the top row with the Phonak Audeo PFE silicone tips, I found these to produce the most U shaped frequency response of the bunch. They gave perhaps the most suction like seal of all the tips with the strongest, hardest hitting bass and treble emphasis. While fun sounding for some songs, they would not be my tip of choice for the Supra, especially for longer listening sessions.
Second on the top row are the Spin-fit tips. Unfortunately the Spin-fits run a little on the small size, so these medium tips were a little too loose in my ear, requiring the deepest fit of all the tips in order to get a decent seal. I suspect if I had large Spin-fits they might indeed be winners as comfort level match Ortofon tips (Ortofon tips are not included in the roundup due to too loose a fit on the Supra nozzle). Treble was just ever so slightly attenuated compared to the stock tips but not as attenuated as the Sony or Earsonic tips. Bass was somewhat lighter due to the less than ideal seal; again, I think larges would have made all the difference in the world here.
Last on the top row are the Sony MH1 tips. These are very, very similar to the Sony Hybrids with a slightly more rigid silicone structure. The smaller bore attenuates treble a bit more from the Spin-fits over stock tips and some may prefer this. Bass hits harder than stock and fit is easily one of the more comfortable fits. I can see these being a community favorite.
Starting on the bottom row are the Earsonics Bi-flange tips. These give the most treble attenuation of the roundup due to having the smallest bore and the deepest fit. Due to the attenuated treble, these also sound more on the bassy side. I found these too dark for my preferences, robbing some of the Supra's magical air, but if one is adverse to treble brightness, they would be worth looking into.
Second on the bottom are what I believe to be Meelec Bi-flanges. I seem to have two kinds of Meelec Bi-flanges- some that the bore is too wide to fit on the Supra nozzle, and this pair which seems to fit perfectly. I'm unsure which model this particular pair fits in the Meelec product range. These tips provide a very comfortable fit for bi-flanges and are one of my favorites on the Supra. Overall sound is balanced with similar bass emphasis as stock tips and perhaps just a hair less treble emphasis due to slightly deeper fit.
Last on the bottom are the Sony Hybrids. See above for MH1 sound, as the Hybrid sound is identical. The only difference is the softer silicone, providing a more comfortable fit that rivals the comfort of foam.
Exhibit #2
Top Row: Jays Foam (discontinued), HiFiman Bi-flange silicone
Bottom Row: Comply T400 foam (stock tips), Jays Silicone
Starting on the top row are the Jays Foam. Unfortunately these appear to be discontinued, as I haven't seen them available anywhere for the last year. They have a fairly dense foam and provide a slightly bigger bass presence over stock and treble sounds pretty similar, but due to their blunt shape, I find them a hassle to get proper fit.
Last on the top are the HiFiman Bi-flange tips. These are probably overkill for the Supra, unless you have very large ear canals, as their bulk will push the Supra out a little further from the ear. Bass was similar to the Sony tips but with similar treble levels to the stock tips. As just mentioned, these should probably only be considered if you have really large canals and most tips are too small for you.
Starting on the bottom row are the stock Comply T400. As mentioned before, these sound excellent to my ears. Bass is clean and fast without any extra ear reverb. Treble is also clean, precise and airy. There is no foam interference across the top of the nozzle to cause treble attenuation issues.
Last on the bottom are the Jays silicone tips, which are still readily available. The Jays tips have the widest bore of all the single flange tips used, therefore they have the brightest treble reproduction, while having similar bass to the Sony tips. Jays silicone tips tend to run on the large size. The large pictured are more like an XL. Jays silicone is one of the thicker, more firmer tips. If you find Sony's too supple and leak too easy, then Jays may be a good choice.
Exhibit #3
Left: Comply TS400 Foam
Right: Vsonic GR07 Silicone
On the left are Comply TS400 foam tips. I tend to prefer this shape of Comply on the Supra, as I can get a better seal and tighter fit with the rounded shape of the TS series. Sound is identical to the stock tips and one of my top 2 choices for the Supra.
On the right are the original Vsonic GR07 silicone tips. These are not Sony knock-offs but Vsonic's own unique tip. The bore is halfway between the Jays silicone and Sony tips, which gives me the most similar treble presence to the stock tips. Bass is similar to the Jays and Sony tips as well. The Vsonic silicone is firmer, like the Jays silicone, but gives me a comfortable and tight seal. Currently these tips are the other of my top 2 choices for the Supra.
So to conclude, I find Comply TS400 and the original Vsonic GR07 silicone tips to be my favorites, with stock tips, Sony MH1 and Hybrids, Meelec Bi-flange as well as Jays silicone all coming close but just shy of my top two.
nehcrow
Excellent review SGS, surprised nobody has commented here. I really think this could be the next big thing - especially at it's price point. You got me hyped bruh
acain
Wow i have never seen someone with sooooo many tips.
tomnyamkun
Hi SGS, thank you for your review!
Just from your memory, would you mind to give a rough comparison between the supra and Noble4?
Thank you very much!
Just from your memory, would you mind to give a rough comparison between the supra and Noble4?
Thank you very much!
Brainwavz S0
Full Disclosure: Brainwavz supplied the S0 for this review
It seems Brainwavz has been cranking out the new releases in their IEM line up of late. This time they’ve entered the fray with a new entrant into the $50 market tier; the Brainwavz S0 has an MSRP of $49.50. Competition in this tier is stout, with a veritable flood of options. Lately Brainwavz seems to be going after clientele that would place value and durability at the top of their shopping list, especially in the “S” range of their line up. Let’s find out how the S0 stacks up to those expectations.
Specifications:
Design and Build
The design of the S0 takes cues from its pricier sibling, the S5. The housings are made of metal and painted black. There are markings for left and right on the housings, as well as the Brainwavz name on the back of the housings around what appears to be a pinhole pressure vent for the dynamic driver. The housings are of very similar shape to the S5 but shorter and without the angled nozzle for over-the-ear wear. While the S0 housings are made to wear down, I was still able to get a decent fit over-the-ear.
The new S0 on the left and more expensive S5 on the right
The strain reliefs are of beefy red rubber. The red and black color scheme is reminiscent of the Brainwavz B2. Exiting the strain reliefs is a flat, black cable that is of the same width as the S5. The flat cable does make the S0 a little more difficult to keep the cable over-the-ear, as it wants to flop off. This flat cable has a very durable looking Y split that is thankfully much smaller than the monstrosity on the S5. I’m glad to see Brainwavz go with the more streamlined look here. Lastly the S0 is terminated with the same straight plug as the S5.
The S0 y-split in the foreground and S5 in the background
The S0 Brainwavz supplied, came without retail packaging but included all the accessories one would find in the retail unit. First and foremost, it comes with the excellent red and black carrying case. This case appears to come with most, if not all of the Brainwavz line up. It’s a little on the thick side but offers nice, hard protection. Also included are a shirt clip, 6 pair of single flange silicone tips, 1 pair dual flange, 1 pair triple flange and 1 pair of Comply S400 tips. The dual flanges were my tips of choice for this review.
It seems Brainwavz has been able to maintain their goal of robustness and durability with a much appreciated streamlining of the Y-split.
So how do they sound? Right out of the box my very first thoughts were that I’m going to prefer these over its more expensive and more high strung sibling, the S5. The overall signature is a moderately bass elevated signature with a very mild V shaped frequency response. It’s pleasing, fun and exceptionally easy to listen to.
While I would describe the bass as plentiful, I would not describe the S0 as a bashead IEM. Its peak is more centered on mid bass, providing fairly broad impact, and while it extends pretty deep, it does start to gently roll off after 50hz. Bass presence is somewhat reminiscent between the S0 and S5 but the S5 does have sizably greater mid bass impact and sounds overall a little faster, cleaner and a bit deeper in direct comparison.
The lower mid is quite full and rich with dip in the middle midrange, giving it the shallow V frequency response. The S5 possesses a thinner and clearer vocal in comparison but it is noticeably more recessed than the S0. Electric and acoustic guitars sound thicker, bolder on the S0 with greater overall note weight.
Treble tonality between the two seems quite similar, with the S0 being the more restrained or tamed version. Both possess similar resonant frequencies but it is less noticeable on the S0, which comes across as smoother with less of an edge than the S5. Where the S5 can bring some fatigue with its lively and more present treble, the S0 stays smooth and friendly at any volume.
The S0 has been called the baby brother of the S5; I can’t think of a better analogy-- a baby brother that’s easier going and easier to get along with.
Comparisons
SoundMagic E10 and Zero Audio Tenore
Compared to Tenore and E10, the S0 is the bassier of the three but not by much. The E10’s impact is just a hair less overall, and while the Tenore’s has quite noticeably less impact, it in contrast produces quite noticeably more sub bass rumble.
The midrange of the E10 move vocals a little closer and sounds a bit more open overall. The Tenore on the other hand, brings vocals even closer and clearer, with very prominent guitars compared to the other two. The S0 has a thicker, richer midrange with weightier, albeit more distant vocals.
The E10 has the most prominent treble presence and sparkle of the three. It sounds obviously brighter, airier and more open than the S0 and Tenore. In fact the Tenore and S0 have similar overall treble presence with the Tenore high end sounding a flatter and more even in frequency response, with the S0 nearly matching the overall smoothness of the Tenore. All three display good extension without being harsh or piercing, even at louder volumes.
Conclusion
Continuing the family lineage of the S series robust and durable builds, the S0 is easily my favorite of the line-up to listen to. The only change I’d like to see is a housing and nozzle shape that is friendlier for over-the-ear wear. The S0 holds it’s own against two of my favorite budget phones, and while different in some areas, it is just as equally enjoyable-- the S0 hits a little harder, has thicker notes and is overall a bit darker but possesses an easy going and easy to get along with signature. Recommended.
visit www.mp4nation.net for more information.
Full Disclosure: Brainwavz supplied the S0 for this review
It seems Brainwavz has been cranking out the new releases in their IEM line up of late. This time they’ve entered the fray with a new entrant into the $50 market tier; the Brainwavz S0 has an MSRP of $49.50. Competition in this tier is stout, with a veritable flood of options. Lately Brainwavz seems to be going after clientele that would place value and durability at the top of their shopping list, especially in the “S” range of their line up. Let’s find out how the S0 stacks up to those expectations.
Specifications:
- Transducers/Drivers: Dynamic, 9mm
- Rated Impedance: 16ohms Closed Dynamic
- Sensitivity: 100dB at 1mW
- Frequency range: 18Hz ~ 18kHz
Design and Build
The design of the S0 takes cues from its pricier sibling, the S5. The housings are made of metal and painted black. There are markings for left and right on the housings, as well as the Brainwavz name on the back of the housings around what appears to be a pinhole pressure vent for the dynamic driver. The housings are of very similar shape to the S5 but shorter and without the angled nozzle for over-the-ear wear. While the S0 housings are made to wear down, I was still able to get a decent fit over-the-ear.
The new S0 on the left and more expensive S5 on the right
The strain reliefs are of beefy red rubber. The red and black color scheme is reminiscent of the Brainwavz B2. Exiting the strain reliefs is a flat, black cable that is of the same width as the S5. The flat cable does make the S0 a little more difficult to keep the cable over-the-ear, as it wants to flop off. This flat cable has a very durable looking Y split that is thankfully much smaller than the monstrosity on the S5. I’m glad to see Brainwavz go with the more streamlined look here. Lastly the S0 is terminated with the same straight plug as the S5.
The S0 y-split in the foreground and S5 in the background
The S0 Brainwavz supplied, came without retail packaging but included all the accessories one would find in the retail unit. First and foremost, it comes with the excellent red and black carrying case. This case appears to come with most, if not all of the Brainwavz line up. It’s a little on the thick side but offers nice, hard protection. Also included are a shirt clip, 6 pair of single flange silicone tips, 1 pair dual flange, 1 pair triple flange and 1 pair of Comply S400 tips. The dual flanges were my tips of choice for this review.
It seems Brainwavz has been able to maintain their goal of robustness and durability with a much appreciated streamlining of the Y-split.
So how do they sound? Right out of the box my very first thoughts were that I’m going to prefer these over its more expensive and more high strung sibling, the S5. The overall signature is a moderately bass elevated signature with a very mild V shaped frequency response. It’s pleasing, fun and exceptionally easy to listen to.
While I would describe the bass as plentiful, I would not describe the S0 as a bashead IEM. Its peak is more centered on mid bass, providing fairly broad impact, and while it extends pretty deep, it does start to gently roll off after 50hz. Bass presence is somewhat reminiscent between the S0 and S5 but the S5 does have sizably greater mid bass impact and sounds overall a little faster, cleaner and a bit deeper in direct comparison.
The lower mid is quite full and rich with dip in the middle midrange, giving it the shallow V frequency response. The S5 possesses a thinner and clearer vocal in comparison but it is noticeably more recessed than the S0. Electric and acoustic guitars sound thicker, bolder on the S0 with greater overall note weight.
Treble tonality between the two seems quite similar, with the S0 being the more restrained or tamed version. Both possess similar resonant frequencies but it is less noticeable on the S0, which comes across as smoother with less of an edge than the S5. Where the S5 can bring some fatigue with its lively and more present treble, the S0 stays smooth and friendly at any volume.
The S0 has been called the baby brother of the S5; I can’t think of a better analogy-- a baby brother that’s easier going and easier to get along with.
Comparisons
SoundMagic E10 and Zero Audio Tenore
Compared to Tenore and E10, the S0 is the bassier of the three but not by much. The E10’s impact is just a hair less overall, and while the Tenore’s has quite noticeably less impact, it in contrast produces quite noticeably more sub bass rumble.
The midrange of the E10 move vocals a little closer and sounds a bit more open overall. The Tenore on the other hand, brings vocals even closer and clearer, with very prominent guitars compared to the other two. The S0 has a thicker, richer midrange with weightier, albeit more distant vocals.
The E10 has the most prominent treble presence and sparkle of the three. It sounds obviously brighter, airier and more open than the S0 and Tenore. In fact the Tenore and S0 have similar overall treble presence with the Tenore high end sounding a flatter and more even in frequency response, with the S0 nearly matching the overall smoothness of the Tenore. All three display good extension without being harsh or piercing, even at louder volumes.
Conclusion
Continuing the family lineage of the S series robust and durable builds, the S0 is easily my favorite of the line-up to listen to. The only change I’d like to see is a housing and nozzle shape that is friendlier for over-the-ear wear. The S0 holds it’s own against two of my favorite budget phones, and while different in some areas, it is just as equally enjoyable-- the S0 hits a little harder, has thicker notes and is overall a bit darker but possesses an easy going and easy to get along with signature. Recommended.
visit www.mp4nation.net for more information.
shureThing
Did you find any driver flex with these or the S5?
shotgunshane
I don't have any flex on the S0 but have just a bit on the S5. Nothing annoying though. The JVC FXT90 used to be a driver flex beast.
whitemass
Invest at higher prices, live longer with devices.
Some audio pieces on here don't give out so quickly, nor give out at all.
Some audio pieces on here don't give out so quickly, nor give out at all.
Brainwavz S5
Disclaimer: I’d like to thank Brainwavz for contacting and offering the review sample.
The Brainwavz S5 is the latest addition to the Brainwavz stable of in-ears. It takes design cues from is sibling S1 but refines them for a more elegant and cohesive aesthetic. It eschews the flashier colors of previous Brainwavz models for a more traditional but stately scheme of simple black and gray.
Design/Build
The S5, like the S1, is built like a tank. The dark gray, slightly rubbery cable is a wide and thick flat cable with oversized and extremely robust black Y splits and strain reliefs. The housings are all metal with shiny black paint with plain white lettering that simply says Brainwavz. While I have no doubts about the construction quality and durability of the S5 package, at the $99 price point, I’d like to see a little more premium feel and elegance to the cables and Y-splits. I’m sure there’s room to offer a bit more aesthetic value here, while not sacrificing much in the way of durability.
Accessories
The S5 comes with the now standard black and red carrying case, which is on the thicker side of cases but is needed for the bulkier than average Brainwavz cables. Brainwavz offers a nice selection of tips, including: 3 sets of black single flange silicone with narrower bore exits, 3 sets of gray single flange silicone with wider bore exits, 1 set of black dual and 1 set of triple flange silicones, and 1 set of Comply. While the dual flange offers me a little better frequency response, due to a looser seal, I prefer the ease of proper fit with the single flange tips; I particularly find the gray singles to provide the best balance of sound over the black singles. The S5 also comes with a 1/8 to 1/4 adapter.
Specifications
Brainwavz lists the S5 specifications as follows:
Sound
The S5 signature is highly reminiscent of the Panasonic HJE-900 and JVC FX700 - Balanced and V shaped. The S5 comes across as rich, powerful and upfront. Bass is boosted throughout the range and reaches deep into sub bass territory; although it is not as bassy as its S1 sibling, it is still well above neutral. The center of the midrange takes a bit of a back seat the powerful bass and forward treble. There is slight recession around 1.5k to 2k but by 3k is back up in a sharp rise in the lower treble to approximately 5.5k. This peak gives the lower treble a very forward presence in the mix- lots of sparkle and just occasionally a hint of sibilance. I also pick up a bit of lower treble resonance here, that extends treble decay and slightly blurs resolution. After 5.5, the treble has one more peak much further up, around 8.5k to 10k, depending on fit depth. After about 13k the S5 begins it’s steep roll off. The S5 definitely seems tuned to ‘Rock Out’!
Comparisons
vs BA200
vs RE400
Conclusion
There is a lot of stiff competition in the $99 price bracket and preferred sound signature should be a top priority. However none will have the durability and robust build of the S5, which will lend itself towards a better solution for a workout or other outdoor activity IEM. While Brainwavz continues to offer excellent value for the purchasers’ dollar, in future $100+ models I’d like to see Brainwavz put some focus towards a more premium aesthetic in both material and design with cabling, plus perhaps a signature geared a little more laid back and smooth but without losing clarity and detail, while being more on the neutral side of presentations. With the S5, Brainwavz has taken the S1 signature and design to the next level with improved bass control/texture and midrange clarity, while preserving the rich, bold and powerful house sound Brainwavz has amassed in this current line of newer products.
Disclaimer: I’d like to thank Brainwavz for contacting and offering the review sample.
The Brainwavz S5 is the latest addition to the Brainwavz stable of in-ears. It takes design cues from is sibling S1 but refines them for a more elegant and cohesive aesthetic. It eschews the flashier colors of previous Brainwavz models for a more traditional but stately scheme of simple black and gray.
Design/Build
The S5, like the S1, is built like a tank. The dark gray, slightly rubbery cable is a wide and thick flat cable with oversized and extremely robust black Y splits and strain reliefs. The housings are all metal with shiny black paint with plain white lettering that simply says Brainwavz. While I have no doubts about the construction quality and durability of the S5 package, at the $99 price point, I’d like to see a little more premium feel and elegance to the cables and Y-splits. I’m sure there’s room to offer a bit more aesthetic value here, while not sacrificing much in the way of durability.
Accessories
The S5 comes with the now standard black and red carrying case, which is on the thicker side of cases but is needed for the bulkier than average Brainwavz cables. Brainwavz offers a nice selection of tips, including: 3 sets of black single flange silicone with narrower bore exits, 3 sets of gray single flange silicone with wider bore exits, 1 set of black dual and 1 set of triple flange silicones, and 1 set of Comply. While the dual flange offers me a little better frequency response, due to a looser seal, I prefer the ease of proper fit with the single flange tips; I particularly find the gray singles to provide the best balance of sound over the black singles. The S5 also comes with a 1/8 to 1/4 adapter.
Specifications
Brainwavz lists the S5 specifications as follows:
- 10mm Dynamic Driver
- 16 ohm Impedance
- Frequency Range: 18Hz-24kHz
- Sensitivity: 110 db @ 1 mW
- Cable: 1.3m/Y-Cord/Flat/Copper
- Plug: 3.5mm Gold Plated
- Fitting: Over Ear Style
- Warranty: 24 Months
Sound
The S5 signature is highly reminiscent of the Panasonic HJE-900 and JVC FX700 - Balanced and V shaped. The S5 comes across as rich, powerful and upfront. Bass is boosted throughout the range and reaches deep into sub bass territory; although it is not as bassy as its S1 sibling, it is still well above neutral. The center of the midrange takes a bit of a back seat the powerful bass and forward treble. There is slight recession around 1.5k to 2k but by 3k is back up in a sharp rise in the lower treble to approximately 5.5k. This peak gives the lower treble a very forward presence in the mix- lots of sparkle and just occasionally a hint of sibilance. I also pick up a bit of lower treble resonance here, that extends treble decay and slightly blurs resolution. After 5.5, the treble has one more peak much further up, around 8.5k to 10k, depending on fit depth. After about 13k the S5 begins it’s steep roll off. The S5 definitely seems tuned to ‘Rock Out’!
Comparisons
vs BA200
- BA200 is more linear and neutral.
- S5 is pretty V shaped in comparison with much greater bass quantity from sub, mid and upper bass.
- S5 treble is much brighter, especially at 5.5k, where I pick up some resonance and extended treble decay. BA200 cymbals sound more realistic and articulate.
- S5 sounds bolder, more aggressive and forward.
- BA200 takes a couple more clicks of the volume to reach the same levels.
- BA200 vocals take more of the focus in presentation when compared to the S5, which tends to put bass guitars and cymbals on equal footing with vocals and occasionally overpowering them.
- BA200 has pretty good distortion guitar bite but S5 have more bite, crunch and edge, due to the rise in FR between 3 and 5.5k. The S5 can really rock out with the various metal genres.
- BA200 sounds more open but S5 sounds bigger/taller and more powerful. More of a rock arena feel.
vs RE400
- Vastly different presentations and it takes some time to readjust; RE400 sounds over damped upon immediate change over from the more forward and brighter S5.
- While the RE400 is much more linear, it has a dip centered at 3k, whereas the S5 is climbing there to its peak at 5.5k, which greatly changes the tonality of vocals between the two. Even though RE400 vocals are more forward and S5’s much more recessed, after a quick change from the S5, the RE400 vocals can sound strangely hollow for a few minutes making the comparison somewhat challenging.
- S5 seems unbridled with raw power next to the more reserved and controlled RE400.
- RE400 has much thinner note compared to the thicker, much bassier S5.
- RE400 lets the vocals lead you through the song; the S5 lets the bass line and drum beat lead you through the song.
- Toms have more snap on the RE400, which have a tendency to get shadowed in the mix with the S5.
Conclusion
There is a lot of stiff competition in the $99 price bracket and preferred sound signature should be a top priority. However none will have the durability and robust build of the S5, which will lend itself towards a better solution for a workout or other outdoor activity IEM. While Brainwavz continues to offer excellent value for the purchasers’ dollar, in future $100+ models I’d like to see Brainwavz put some focus towards a more premium aesthetic in both material and design with cabling, plus perhaps a signature geared a little more laid back and smooth but without losing clarity and detail, while being more on the neutral side of presentations. With the S5, Brainwavz has taken the S1 signature and design to the next level with improved bass control/texture and midrange clarity, while preserving the rich, bold and powerful house sound Brainwavz has amassed in this current line of newer products.
Disclaimer: I’d like to thank Beyerdynamic for loaning me the A200p for review. The sample will be returned to Beyerdynamic following evaluation.
Reprinted from: http://cymbacavum.com/2014/06/02/beyerdynamic-a200p-portable-digital-amplifier/
The Beyerdynamic A200p is a very small DAC/Amp combo for portable use with computers, iPads, iPhones, and Android phones.
The device itself is 55×55×13 mm and the included leather case with belt strap adds minimal bulk. It features and on/off/lock switch, headphone out, play/pause/forward/reverse side buttons, micro USB connection, and a very large rotating volume wheel (more on this later).
While the USB connection is a standard micro-B type, it is recessed and compatibility with generic cables seems improbable, so you may be limited to the included proprietary cables, which includes one long cable for computer use, and two shorter cables for iDevice and Android usage. Beyerdynamic does sell replacement cables.
Other features include a Wolfson WM8740 DAC chip, volume control of 135 steps, and an estimated 11 hour play time. Output impedance is an importantly small 1.1 Ω and outputs 1.7 Vrms in the USA version.
Both the USA and EU versions default to being volume limited (to 150 mVrms, in accordance with EU-50332-2) but the USA version allows for volume limit override by holding down the play button for a few seconds. Once the volume limit is removed, the A200prestarts the volume at its lowest setting as protection feature.
MSRP is $299 USD, which makes it one of the more affordable DAC/Amp combos able to play with most portable devices.
Usage
The A200p is very easy to use and it’s small size means you can stick in a pocket and easily take it with you. The flush volume wheel is the first thing you notice about the design, after all it takes up the entire front side of the device.
Upon initially receiving the device, I found the volume wheel very frustrating to use. Sometimes, I could easily get it turning, yet other times I couldn’t get it to move no matter how hard I tried. Beyerdynamic does include stick-on pads to help with usage problems; the pad gives your thumb some grip to help rotate it. However, I found that after a week’s use, the volume wheel loosened enough to turn it with every attempt.
For that first week, I do recommend using the stick-on pad — especially with computer use when the default computer volume can be set initially high or when changing between vastly differing sensitivity of earphones.
After finally breaking in and mastering the volume wheel operation, you really come to appreciate the 135 steps of volume control. So many amps, computers and phones give you quite large increases in volume with each click or turn of their volume controls, making it difficult to find a comfortable but loud enough volume selection. TheA200p is very pleasing in this respect — you have quite a bit of wheel movement before the volume increase becomes much louder- and works excellently for super-sensitive IEMs.
My only complaint would be that you cannot control volume through a typically slim jeans pant pocket; you will have to remove the A200p from tighter pockets in order to change it but larger pockets, like a jacket or cargos, should have enough room for you to maneuver the volume wheel while still concealed.
The only other design frustration I experienced was over the side buttons for forward/reverse/play/pause- those three buttons are incredibly sensitive to any pressure. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve accidentally skipped a song when moving the A200p around or trying to get the volume wheel moving in the early days.
Physical buttons are pretty much a requirement for a completely satisfying mobile audio experience, in order to operate unsighted, but some added resistance to these side buttons would be much appreciated.
Sound Quality
The sound quality of the A200p is very good and the overall presentation is pretty neutral — I didn’t detect any emphasis at any part of the frequency response- with nice linearity and balance. In fact, besides the Astell&Kern AK100 (with which the A200p shares much internal processing hardware, including its discrete analog circuitry), this is the only other implementation of the Wolfson 8740 I have heard that I actually like and would recommend.Unlike some other reviewers have reported about the similar Astell&Kern AK10, I do not detect even a hint of added warmth; most other implementations of this particular chip, that I have heard, come across as either dark or overly warm or both.
While the A200p comes across as neutral and pretty transparent, overall resolution seems about average — it’s not overly smooth and glossing over details, yet neither is it a gamma knife of plankton extraction. Descriptors that come to mind are: solid and respectable, balanced and clear — there are no sins of commission.
Besides lack of precise volume control, another problem that plagues many portable amps and DACs is the background noise or hiss with sensitive IEMs. I’m happy to report the background of theA200p is satisfyingly quiet. I detected no noise or hiss with any of my IEMs; even the extremely sensitive FitEar F111 was pin droppingly quiet.
In usage with my iPhone 5S, iPad mini (with Retina display) and my MacBook Pro (all of which have excellent sound quality already, especially for non-audio specific devices), I didn’t detect any significant differences in sound signature, except perhaps a bit better bass definition — not an increase in quantity, just better perceived definition.
Conclusion
The Beyerdynamic A200p, with 135 steps of volume control, 1.1 Ω output impedance, neutral sound, and a super quiet background, makes for the perfect companion to owners of super-sensitive balanced armature IEMs looking for ultimate portability.Pros:
- Portable Size
- 135 Volume Steps
- Low Output Impedance (1.1 Ω)
- Silent Background
Cons:
- External Buttons Too Sensitive
- Recessed micro USB Port
For more information on the Beyerdynamic A200p, please visit:
http://north-america.beyerdynamic.com/shop/a-200-p-us.html
shotgunshane
@SallyMae, I don't consider that a lukewarm statement. The iPhones, since the 4, have been excellent neutral performers. It takes a significantly better amp stage to better it. For instance anything in the Fiio lineup at E17 level and lower is a step backwards but a Leckerton UHA-6s or Meier Quickstep are indeed an improvement in resolution and definition. If you needed to drive some less sensitive headphones or super low impedance iems (like the Shure SE846), the A200p would be an excellent choice, especially if footprint were a priority. The SE846 sounds a bit wooly with the iPhone 5 output impedance.
SallyMae
Shane, thanks for feedback. Interestingly, someone on this site reckons the output from his iPhone worked better with his 846's than the A200p; he returned it!
Don't you think these devices should be markedly superior to justify their existence?
Jamie Lendino from PC Mag was very unimpressed with the AK100. I smell Snake Oil...
Don't you think these devices should be markedly superior to justify their existence?
Jamie Lendino from PC Mag was very unimpressed with the AK100. I smell Snake Oil...
shotgunshane
The SE846 did not sound good with the iPhone 5 at 3.3 ohms. At the time I had the SE846 in my possession, I did not have the A200p on hand but the 1 ohm amps I had at the time sounded much better, clearer and defined. The SE846 is not an easy one to properly drive due to its 8ohm impedance rating.
The AK100 that I paid for and owned as a modded AK100 from Red Wine Audio. It had less than 1 ohm impedance after the mod. It was a fine sounding player IMO. I just greatly preferred iOS ease of use. AK has since fixed the output impedance issues of that player. I understand people's issues with AK pricing strategy but their products are far from snake oil.
And no I don't expect a very tiny device at $299 to be significantly better than the iPhone 5 or 5s. Everything has compromises.
The AK100 that I paid for and owned as a modded AK100 from Red Wine Audio. It had less than 1 ohm impedance after the mod. It was a fine sounding player IMO. I just greatly preferred iOS ease of use. AK has since fixed the output impedance issues of that player. I understand people's issues with AK pricing strategy but their products are far from snake oil.
And no I don't expect a very tiny device at $299 to be significantly better than the iPhone 5 or 5s. Everything has compromises.
Anyhow, it's clear that Solar has too much bass quantity for your taste. I also have the AR6 and while it has a very different signature, I can fully understand that it ended up at 5 stars in your earlier review. But 'only' 4 stars as a final verdict for the Solar? Ah well, maybe I'm more basshead (something for me to think about) than I thought I was
Cheers!